It's already being used. And it's a pretty good argument.

And it's the kind of argument non-boaters and politicians can understand and hang their hat on.

And exactly what does horse power have to do with it:confused: I'm sure my two inboard/outboards are cleaner than 12 ,100 hp two stroke outboards:eek:
What are you going to try next , color , shape , 1 , 2 or 3 engines , date of manufacture , location of manufacture , number of passengers it can hold , gross weight , with or without a windshield.
I'll swear , I've never heard so much noise from so few people in all my life:laugh: :laugh:

What are you saying?
 

Bear Islander,

Now that the exclusionary agenda you support is starting to come out, whether or not you are part of Winnfabs, let me elaborate on what you are saying.

No more boats with 300HP or more on the lake means no more Mount Washington, a legend that has been on the lake longer than most of us have been alive. Take the Doris E and the Sophie C off the lake as well and end the mail service to the folks on the islands.

You make a ton of sense:confused:

R2B

Hi Cal, At the Marine Patrol site there is a long list of NH lakes that already have horsepower limits. This is nothing new. HP and year of manufacture are listed on the registration of every boat.

Hi Resident2B, The Mount, Sophie C. and Doris E. all have dates of manufacture before 2008.

Please don't get so worked up, this is just one guys idea.

Without even looking , I'll bet they're all smaller than Winni and probably considerably smaller.
The statement was made about hp limits on drinking water lakes and again I'll say I'll bet my two I/Os are cleaner than 12 , 100 hp two stroke outboards , or 24 , 50 hp's

Lake & Pond restrictions in New Hampshire
 

If you go to this LINK and review RSA 270:76 through 270:131 you can find the names of the lakes, or in most cases the ponds, that Bear Islander referes to.

Since Winnipesaukee is the largest lake east of the Mississippi contained in one state.... or whatever the claim is, that is a safe bet. That doesn't mean a hp limit will not work on a large lake.

Two stoke engines have been all but eliminated by federal engine regulations. That is why you see all the four stroke outboards now.

Better tell Mercury , Evinrude and Johnson. They're still selling plenty and I have no plans to stop that I've heard of:)

I think you know what I mean. The old polluting two strokes are gone. The new two strokes have to be heavily engineered to meet tough EPA regulations.

How closely did you look? I don't see any "wrong wave" or "wrong wake" that caused the crash impact. And his passengers "paid the price" with more than a fractured pelvis suffered by the female passenger. Her bikini top got ripped off in the impact, and soared 40 feet over the crash vessel. You missed that during your careful analysis of the crash video, maybe.

Thanks, jrc for New Hampshire's wake-jumper RSAs.

I do not think that her bikini top got ripped off, where the heck did you get that? Part of the windshield did break loose as did a towel fly. I have read comments from people at the scene on another site, by a friend of occupants of the vessel involved. They were the other boat pictured side by side before the lead boat moved ahead for the camera shoot. It was a wave that they caught at a bad angle when they landed. Maybe you should watch it again...

Please tell me what the impact was with then if there was no wave or wake involved???

Sorry , I simply read what you said...didn't fill in any blanks. But until they are outlawed there will still be the older ones around for years. And yes , I know some places have already banned them out west.

It is a very big lake. Common resource for all.
 

Good point. It's a big lake.

When people live in a big city and don't care for the big buildings and the noise they try to find a place to live where they can be happy. I think that our lake has something for everyone and am always overwhelmed with how most of us try to share it together.

Perhaps if someone longs for peace and quite and small boats they should find that type of lake or pond so they can be happy with the restrictive environment they long for. We don't kayak at the Weirs but have no problem finding an appropriate spot to enjoy quite time with the lake.

I don't think it is up to the government to legislate your idea of what you would like the rest of us to do to make the lake the way you would like it.

If I ever feel that the lake is too busy or the waves are too big when the wind blows, I would consider it my responsibility to find a place I could be more happy. Hey but that's just me.

So far off on both side.... can there ever be comprimise
 

I have been reading this thread off and on wondering where things are going to go. And one thing strikes me everyone has picked a side and no one seems willing to compromise. certainly there are many issues speed, size, and noise levels that always come up. And sure the lake is here for eveyone to enjoy, but it is also our reposibility to preserve it tranquility. Myself I live on the Northern side of the lake where it is quiter most of the time, because I have no interest in being buy the hustle and bussle of Laconia and the wiers etc. that is a choice I made. I also made a choice to own a small boat because on the bad days I have no need to go out. In short people need to have some freedom to enjoy what the like.

Now when it come to speed... yes there are all kinds of arguments but when it come down to it we regulate speeds on the roads, why not in certain area of the lake... a comprimise that will still leave areas of the lake open for speed demons, but will insure that area where traffic tends to be heavier have some addition control.

when you look at noise.... the best thing when used properly ever invented where switchable exhaust... unfortunately NH saw fit to outlaw them......

As for size.... well I am one that admits enough is enough...... you can put specialties clause in for the Mount etc. but at some point the size of the yachts needs to be controled.....it seems that every year some get a bigger model, and the Marinas find a way to accomidate them..... when I watch my boat and dock get yanked around buy the incosiderate... few I know.... cruiser owner with displacemnt hulls that through out huge wakes it does get irritating.....how to comprimise here well this is tough....but I would say any boats currently on the lake are fine..... and start restricting what comes onto the lake........not that enforcing this would be easy.... there would be alot of responsibilty on the marina's I feel.....

Anyways enough of my rambles.... remember these are My views.... just as I appriciate everyone else... take mine for what they are MINE.....

I see the situation differently. I think if you want to buy a 1500 hp boat that is your business. But you need to use it in the ocean or some other body of water that is large enough for you to use it without endangering and disturbing others. Somewhere that is not a drinking water supply.

It IS the job of the government to protect our natural recourses and provide safety standards.

It actually amazes me that people can think speed limits on our highways are logical, necessary and in the public interest. However speed limits on our waterways are outrageous, illogical, unnecessary, dangerous or a violation of our rights.

As usual, I totally agree with you RGuy.

BI. You said if someone wants a 1500 hp boat they shouldn't use it on this lake but on the ocean or some other big body of water. Didn't you just say that Winni is the largest in one state east of the Mississippi? So?
Did you ever stop to think that sometimes YOU in your kayak are an annoyance to someone in a big boat who has to watch out for you? It works both ways, you know.

I still haven't got the connection between HP and drinking water. I know I don't drain my oil into the lake , nor do I bubble carbon monoxide though the water with my exhaust , so what's the big whoop:confused:
As far as speed limits on the highway , THERE'S NOT 150' RULE THERE. Cars have a 10 to 12 foot lane and can pass at a closing speed of 110 mph on a two lane 55 mph highway. I have yet to see a deer jump out in front of a boat.
Finally , if i didn't like my neighborhood , I'd move. You said yourself it's the biggest lake east of the Mississippi.

LIforrelaxin has the right attitude. Anything else will just give you ulcers and a lot of other people a P.I.A.;)

Having driven quite a bit, all over the world, I can honestly say I vastly prefer places without speed limits or with really high speed limits. Not only can one make better time, the drivers in these places tend to be vastly superior to a typical driver here. I'd vote to eliminate or raise speed limts and increase the requirements for getting a license in NH.

Just curious...

Did speed cause this or something else?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

LIforrelaxin wrote:
Island/relaxin I understand what you are saying. The thing is, from what the Marine Patrol and anecdotal evidence suggests, excessive speed, even on the broads, is something that, if it happens, it is rare. So the folks advocating a speed limit are doing so with another goal in mind.

I 1-Thousand precent agree! Noise limits are needed. I don't have a boat that makes excessive noise, but I know that I was refueling once, just once, and I was having problems keeping the engine running (bad fuel), and while I was trying to hear the engine a loud boat fired up a dozen yards away and I couldn't hear my own engine. Yes, noise can be a problem.

I disagree here, who are you, or who am I to say someone can't purchase a substantial yacht and bring her onto the lake? You exempt the Mount because she's been on the lake for decades? Hell, my great grandfather lost his boat in the fire that destroyed the first Mount, the paddle wheeled steamer. (we still have my Great Grandfather's boat's flag and mount saved from the fire) So what if I wanted to become a competitor? My family certainly has just as much right and history! If someone has the money to bring in another substantially sized boat and can work a deal to moor her, who am I to say no? Who are you to say no? What makes the Mount untouchable in that case?

You make a good point that large personal cruisers can be a serious issue in the wrong hands. I was coming out of Paugus Bay with a friend who lives near Gov's Island. We were in a 23' bowrider. A large Carver passed us well beyond 150 feet and he was booking it, but the bow wave on that cruiser was going up above the bow onto the cabin deck! I have done some ocean boating in my life and I have never seen anything like that! The couple was on the flybridge and they were getting the spray from the bow wave!

I've never seen anything like it! I figure a combination of a poorly designed boat and ignorant skippers! Watching them convinced all of us to never buy a Carver and the wake he kicked up was amazing! You could have surfed on it!

Cruisers in the wrong hands are a problem, but that is a problem that will be addressed only through both, education of the bonehead skippers of the Cruiser/Bowrider/PWC/GoFast boat that are screwing up, and of them also being chastised by folks at his marina, yacht club, etc. Only then will they learn but probably very slowly. There are too many of these boats on the lake and each of them represents big money so they are not going away.

Certainly, it is easier for the legislature and advocates of a speed limit to pass a speed limit law but it won't solve a thing because, as has been shown through statistics, there isn't a speed problem on Lake Winnipesaukee there are other issues that are already regulated but not enforced consistantly.

When I first suggested a long time ago that the MP and SP be merged for better coverage on land and on the water and efficent control over financial resources I was told to mind my own business and to keep my mouth shut because I was critical of the NH way! Someone even asked I really believed the SP would give up their weapons to take to the water! I didn't bother to answer back then because the question was foolish, it still is.

Of course just because I pay taxes in three (3) NH communities and I still can't vote or have any say in town or state policy, what right do I have? Why shoud I have any say in how the money is spent or what laws are passed? By the way, how many towns in NH do folk on this forum pay property taxes in? Just curious.

:coolsm:
AW

Inland Lakes...shaken, not stirred
 

The reply:

Now that you've asked twice, here's just one reminder of those inland waters of Wolfeboro—2 summers ago:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...nWolfeboro.jpg

I prefer to stay in my neighborhood and see to it that standards of safety, environment and water purity are maintained. It's the people that are introducing faster, larger, noisier, polluting boats that must be kept from moving into this neighborhood.

Five states have banned recreational power boating on all drinking water sources. Many more have horsepower limits on their drinking water sources. Mass has a 10 hp limit on reservoirs. Even with MTBE free gas being sold on the lake it can be introduced by trailer boaters. MBTE attacks the central nervous system. And there are other pollutants in gas besides MTBE.

NH is one of the few states that allow unrestricted power boating on drinking water sources.

So now you want ALL powerboats of winni?
 

"NH is one of the few states that allow unrestricted power boating on drinking water sources."


So now you are going to push to restrict all powerboats from the lake? Is that what you are saying?


I think I will become a birch bark canoe dealer, That way I can corner the market before your proposed restrictions take place! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Please stop deliberately misunderstanding what I post. It's not fair and not funny.

If you have a point, make it. Trying to change my words to suit you purpose is silly.

Your island must have a bridge.....
 

I can't think of anything to say to hurt your cause more than you just did.
Thank You:)

Hows that saying go? Something about glass houses.....
 

Why, that is what you do on here daily. Also I am not changing your words, I was kind enought to quote you directly. I would dare say most others would read your words to mean the same I did, so therefore no "deliberate misunderstanding".

Where are the boats he was racing? Was the end result an accident like in the video clip? Just showing a random picture of a boat in choppy water in Wolfboro catching air doesn't relate to that video at all. Sorry but all you're "reminding" me of is how choppy lake winni can be at times!! :laugh:

That explains a lot... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

and to think, we have the environmentalists to thank for its usage.

Thanks... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

and its replacement, ethanol, is increasing the food prices and raising havoc with combustion engine fuel systems.

Thanks, again... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I don't doubt that one bit. I also don't doubt that that are small enough 10hp could get you anywhere on the lake in a matter of minutes and a large high horse power boat could barely get to top speed before having to slow , stop or turn because they're running out of water , but don't mention that. I live in a town with a lake limited to electric trolling motors. It's all of about 5 acres.

I see exactly what you mean with the MTBE. May I suggest changing to bottled water for drinking. You know what fish do in the water:rolleye2:

I think you might have missed my point here... I think the Broads should be a wide open avenue for speed.... but more then once I have had speed deamons buzz around me in tight crowded quarters. So in my mind putting speed limits in Areas like Wolfeboro Bay and Center Harbor are a good idea... putting one in around a place like the Wiers wouldn't be bad either but defining the speed zone could be rough. As for other goals the blanklet speed limit people have.... we all know what they are trying to do...



I should have been more clear here.... If someone wants to bring a boat to compete with the mount then yes they should have the oppertunity to do so. The mount should not be allowed a monopoly....The control needs to be on the recreational boats.......And I am sorry but my opinion is that Some of the boats on the lake have gotten to large.......but this is my opinion... and yes I know that there are many large boat owner that operate responsible.... it the ones that don't that have caused the problems.... and that is unfortunate.....

It wasn't the wave when they landed, it was the water condtions when they launched. It isn't possible to see what altered the boat's attitude in the air, causing it to land sideways. It's most likely the captain's option of going too fast for conditions. Or as you put it, "Showboating". If the cause was easy to see, the driver wouldn't have had the choice or ability, to alter his course in the air, other than inevitably landing at those high speeds on the boat's side.

The captain of the boat had no control of his boat whatsoever while he was "getting air." His passengers and crew no longer had a voice in the driver's capabilities and skills. They were now at the mercy of brutal physics. These "performance boats" have heavily bolstered interiors and seats to protect the passengers against injury. But operating at high speed, zero control in the air, and uncertain waters below wrote the ending even before the helicoper started to record it. Winnipesaukee saw at least three similar high speed crashes in three successive summer seasons. None on Winnipesaukee were videotaped.

Would the other site admit to seeing an injured passenger, not just with a triple fracture of her pelvis, but being naked too? Look again at the video, especially at 1:03 and 1:18. The video ends at 1:23. Use the "pause" feature and don't make the common mistake of enlarging the screen for clarity, please.

There's no denying the windshield gets ripped away by the impacting force of the water. It's tinted, and was launched to fly very high above the boat. The same sudden thrust of water that tore off the windshield ripped the bikini top upwards close to the glass fragment in the air. Or what her friends call a towel. If it's a towel, it's a towel that stays in the shape of a bikini top.

http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=1155180898

You are wrong again. Quabbin Reservoir is a comparable size and shape with Winnipesaukee. 39 square miles to 69 square miles. It has a 10 hp limit.

Yes, if you enjoy comparing apples to oranges.

URL link:http://www.mass.gov/dcr/parks/central/quabbin.htm

Yes, that definitely reads as if it were written with the Lake in mind... :D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Quabbin also has a protected watershed with almost all development prohibited. If that had been put into place on Winni, you wouldn't live on Bear Island, Laconia would not be a tourist town, and none of us would be on here in the first place.

'Found My Wand...
 

Oh, I think it'd be plenty crowded.

The lake is too good a tourist-draw to have remained uncrowded: it's future likely to have been in State or Federal control.

The state would have put up lodges and provided buses for tours. All the surrounding towns would profit via their restaurants, touristy cabin-motels, video rentals, RV campsites and small-boat rentals. Summer camps for kids would be given special exemptions for zoning and taxes. Existing lakeside and hillside residences from the time the park was established would be allowed to remain throughout the lives of the original owners, then bulldozed after a eminent domain purchase. (As is done now in many locales).

Mt. Washington boat tours would be booked for months in advance and private tourist boats—operated by retirees—would take those turned away.

The entire Lake Winnipesaukee Basin would have become a State or National Park. Forests would go to "Old Growth" and the surrounding hillsides restricted to woods with only selective cutting. There would have been official and private camping sites scattered about—with clearings for nature trails, overlooks, and educational exhibits. Even snowmobile access could have been limited—as in Yellowstone Park National Park recently.

To retain the quietude of Thoreau's time, to protect the shorelines, to keep the air pristine, to ensure tourists' safety, to protect loons, to continuously-project its alpine and native-American ambiance, "On Golden Pond National Park" would prohibit the launching of "extreme boats" onto its waters.

The only difference between Quabbin and Winni is the degree of protection they receive. Quabbin is well protect against the pollution of boats. Winni is poorly protected against boat pollution. That does not mean they are inherently different, it means Winni needs more protection from out of control boating, and she is going to get it.

The number of people served by the water supply doesn't make any difference. Is it OK to pollute the water because the number of people that drink it is relatively small. Obviously not!

I can still get to the island with a 10 hp. For a few islanders that is the only boat they have.

Hopefully swimming etc will never have to be banned on Winni. But tighter regulations on lake use are happening all the time. Check out the new shore land protection act. Get used to it!

However I don't understand your argument. Are you saying that because making Winni exactly like Quabbin would be odious, then we can't make Winni even a little like Quabbin? That argument does not follow.

Your argument was that boating did nothing to pollute drinking water. That turned out to be false. Your argument had been that only tiny reservoirs had speed limits. That turned out to be false. You argument is boating need not be regulated on Winni. That is also false.

And this is all true in "your" way of thinking and half truths:emb:
First off Winnis 72 square miles the last time I checked , not 69 sq. mi. as you posted. Given your other half truths I would doubt the 39 sq mi is correct too. Probably more like 36 which is half the size.
Now excuse me for a couple of hours while I go stir up some water and make some noise.

It's great that with all the points I made you only find fault with the size of the lake.

Winni is 69 square miles, if you want to include Paugus it is 71, at least that is what Wikipedia says.

Trust me , I could and a lot of others continually find a LOT of faults and half truths. I try to keep it nice and keep most of my thoughts to myself as do many others.
BTW , check the Winnipesaukee.com home page. 72 square miles;)

Every post of yours that I read now has this disclaimer, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it means. The disclaimer is straight forward enough. It's the example that blows me away. I live ( ITD "lives" if someone else were describing it) in a small town in Massachusetts. I would never tell anyone that I live on Lake Winnipesaukee because I know that that would be misleading. I would say something to the effect of " I stay at the lake during the summer." Which I actually do say regularly to my neighbors or anyone who needs to know. Furthermore, you say "...takes up residence for an indefinite period." . Couldn't indefinite mean an unlimited period? I think it may have been better to use finite instead of infinite. Anyway I know you don't like people parsing your words, but I don't consider your use of "lives" as the "generic or everyday meaning".:)