US Coast Guard on Speed and Accidents
 

Incredibly, HB162 opponents often repeat the claim that speed is not a safety problem. Below is a summary of US Coast Guard statistics on 2004 boating accidents.

Speed is listed as the #4 contributing factor in boating accidents. #1 Reckless Operation and #2 Inattention are already against the law. Inattention was the charge in the recent fatal accident of Winni. #3 Inexperience has already been addressed by the Boating Safety Certificate law. Now it is time for HB162 to address contributing factor #4 Speed.

The statistics also show that "Collision with Vessel" is the #1 type of boating accident by 3 to 1.

Top cause of fatalities seems to be "alcohol" and most types of accidents a causing fatalities is "falls overboard"(more than likely related to alcohol).
So lets ban alcohol"

Oh yes . I don't drink anyway...so neither can you.
Nice attitude , huh???

Boating under the influence is already against the law! That is my point, speed is the only major factor not yet addressed by law.

Some additional info
 

In case everyone doesn't have the link to the full report:
http://www.uscgboating.org/statistic...stics_2004.pdf

If you do a search on "Excessive Speed" in that document, you will not find it defined as a particular speed, in fact its just a checkbox on the accident report. We would need to contact the US Coast Guard to find out, but my guess would be that excessive speed can be applied in different ways. Yes, a boat traveling 60 mph did a sharp turn and it flipped. Reason X - Excessive Speed, X- Sharp Turn (Look in that report for how that check reasons off)

I would also think that a boat traveling at 20 mph, hits a docks at 20 mph, should have the reasons X- Excessive, X - Operator Inattention

For one, I personally think excessive speed can be a reason applied TO ANY accident if the boats are moving (see definition of safe speed from the US Coast Guard http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/mwv/navru...es/Rule06.htm). So I would like to state, at least myself, I'm not saying "speed is not a safety issue". What opposition is saying is that the arbitrary limits choosen are not supported by any facts as they apply to OUR lakes.

Not really
 

Stupidity is not against the LAW. I don't see how a speed limit law will help. Just drive on a road with a posted limit of 55MPH and see how fast there is a car or truck on your rear bumper pushing (drafting for the NASCAR set) you or flashing their lights.

Statistics can prove any point of view
 

The US Coast Guard report from 2003 and 2004 has some details about speed and accidents.

Boating Statistics 2003 – US Dept of Homeland security – Coast Guard
Accidents and fatalities
Not moving 815 61
Under 10 mph 1,173 164
10 to 20 mph 1,147 43
21 to 40 mph 1,082 56
Over 40 mph 180 14
Not Reported 2,966 365

The numbers in the 2004 report are
Accidents and fatalities

Not moving 810 66
Under 10 mph 1,242 163
10 to 20 mph 1,020 40
21 to 40 mph 933 49
Over 40 mph 137 14
Unknown 2,583 344

SPEED

Where speed was reported, it turns out that there were more accidents and fatalities with boats not moving at all than at over 40. The most dangerous speed is under 10.

In my opinion, excessive speed has little if anything to do with speed limits. I smell a red herring.

What do you mean by "Excessive speed has little if anything to do with speed limits" that statement contradicts itself. It also contradicts the USCG data that shows it to be the #4 cause of boating accidents.

Lets take the USCG report at face value. Speed Kills!

I really do like this report
 

Check out this graph, something looks obvious to me, smaller boats are the problem! Imagine this, we set a minimum length to boats on Winnipesaukee, sorry couldn't resist.

EXACTLY!!!! Facts and figures can LIE , yet be totally truthful.It's all in the way it is presented.
You know that old saying??? "Figures lie and liars figure"...go figure.


The universal answer to the whole problem???alcohol.
If the speed limit proponents stay drunk enough , they won't care how fast the rest go:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Seriously though , have a Merry Christmas and DON'T drink and drive;)

Why would you post such misleading data without an explanation?

First, it is the length of the boat THE VICTIM IS IN that is reported by the USCG. So if a 32' boat goes up and over a 19' boat killing someone, the USCG reports it as a death in a boat 16' to 26'.

Second, the vast majority of boats are under 26' probably around 99% (a guess). How would that graph look if it was death per 1,000,000 boats.

winnilaker

There are quite a few deaths in PWCs. They are under 16' and they go much faster than 45 MPH. And many boats under 26' are fast.

HB162 is about SPEED!

Bear Islander,
Without using numbers, please define excessive speed? This way we'll all be on the same page. "HB162 can't just be about speed ALONE" or supporters would be trying to pass a No Wake Zone for the entire lake.

OUR lake had a fatal night accident at 28 MPH. That is a FACT that proves your statement to be incorrect.

I will defer my definition of "Excessive Speed" to the RR&D commitee. They believe it to be 25 at night and 45 during the day.

If HB162 passes we will all have a legal definition of Excessive Speed!

I'll defer to your post that started this thread, where you don't define excessive speed as it is interpreted for this report.

As for your definition for excessive speed, thank you.

my guess?
 

Herein lies exactly the point (or at least one of them). Once HB162 is passed, there will be no more quibbling and opining about whether a speed was excessive. Aside from what other limitations already exist which can be cited against those going faster or slower, if one is going over 45, his speed will be legally excessive (or 25 if at night). Now that's a law that requires no "guessing".

USCG Report
 

This report as previous years shows no statistical reason for speed limits on our waterways. Please review the Vessel Information page from this report regarding boat speed. Fewer vessels were involved in accidents at speeds over 40 mph than any other category including not moving once again, with 137 of the total 6,725 vessels in 2004 falling from 180 in 2003. The Coast Guard report does list excessive speed as the fourth top contributing factor for all accidents with operator inexperience, careless/wreck less operation, and operator inattention taking the top three. The same report glossary defines speeding as - operating at a speed, possibly below the posted limit, above that which a reasonable and prudent person would operate under the circumstances. By definition excessive speed / speeding does not have a particular value and therefore can occur at any speed. With 137 vessels nationwide involved in accidents at speeds over 40mph and excessive speed being one of the top contributing factors with all vessels involved (6,725) it can be concluded that most excessive speeding accidents currently occur under 40mph.

Chase1

FJ,
Exactly, no more misinterpreting what is and what isn't excessive. That's why I'm personally fighting to get it right the first time. For future generations to not look back and say, "this law doesn't address the majority of the real problems"

You may or may not be aware of a new bill proposed by Rep. Spang and Rep. Currier to look into boating safety in more detail. You have the means to find the bill. If folks want me to post it here I can. Spang and Currier were on the R,R & D committee, Spang for a speed limit and Currier against, yet they both came together to draft this new one to really look into boating safety in NH. It has both opponents and supporters on the commission, so it should be well deversed and objective.

My point here is why pass a new law, when we have the opportunity to dive into the real issues on the lake.

Actually, I think you guys are both wrong... I think the quibbling will continue regardless... the conditions prevalent at the time of the incident will always be a factor.

The Coast Guard standard for determining excessive speed bears some serious consideration.

For example, if you are traveling at 25mph in a dense fog and have an accident of some sort, collide with another boat or hit a dock/shoreline. Your rate of travel, 25mph, although legal under HB-162 it would be considered excessive speed by using the Coast Guard standard.

You can be traveling at 45mph thru the Weirs on a busy summer saturday, all perfectly legal under HB-162, regardless of conditions... that is until you collide with someone or something... all within a perfectly legal speed, but it could be considered excessive speed by the Coast Guard standard.

Not to beat a dead horse, but the 28mph the Littlefield boat was traveling at might (and I mean might) have been considered excessive speed for the prevalent conditions. (dark night) It would not have been considered speeding under HB-162. When was the last time anybody got a speeding ticket for 3mph over the limit? The standard is usually 10+MPH over the posted limit.

Woodsy

You are right! So we should make the speed limits of HB162 apply to smaller boats too. Oh wait, they already would.;)

Assuming this committee also concludes as the RR&D did that new laws or limits are deserved, and your crowd therefore fights this bill as you have every bill or effort in the past that aimed to put limits on unruly and objectional behavior (noise laws, PWC laws, loon protection, etc), and you are successful in dragging this one out two years as you did HB162, then I will be in my forties. I am getting too old to keep waiting to use our lake again.
Let's go with HB162 for now, then if the committee comes up with some better solution, they can always write directly into that bill a provision for expiring the speed limit law. The statutes are full of deleted obsolete laws...its not that big a deal.

The authorites are always going to have the choice to apply the stricter of two or more laws in any given situation. A 45mph speed limit is not going to override the reckless operation law, the 150-ft law, the BWI law, or any other law that is violated. The 45mph limit merely gives the MP another tool in their holster. If they refuse to use that tool, that's a discussion for next year. That is why it is so curious to see Glendale fighting this with the argument that it would be "ineffective". If it was truly going to be ineffective at slowing the fast few down, would there really be this much of a stink raised about it? Meaningless laws tend to get very little attention. But then, didn't the director also say that he wasn't aware of any boating problems on Lake Winnipesaukee last winter (before thousands came to the hearings to testify from both sides about the infinity of boating safety problems they were witnessing on the lake)?

Speed limits can encourage excessive speed
 

As the posts that followed yours point out, my statement does not contradict itself. Excessive speed can be 10 MPH, which has little if anything to do with speed limits. Excessive speed is any speed at which an accident occurs which would have not occurred at a slower speed. If an legal definition of excessive speed is set at 45, that becomes a legal point of view, but says nothing about safety. There can still be accidents caused by excessive speed at speeds below 45, and there can be very safe travel at 60mph (even though it would unfortunately become an legal infraction). The main point of argument here is that speeds above 45 alone have not been shown to cause an abnormal share of accidents yet a set speed limit continues to be brought up as a way to improve safety. Going too fast for conditions is a problem and should remain a point of concern. Going fast is not the problem, but sending the message that 44 mph is always ok because its below the speed limit is dangerous.

I thought No-Wake zones were reserved for the waters in front of the houses of NHRBA members. ;)

It is not the fact that HB162 is about speed. I'm worried about all the amendments being tacked to it. Like all body of water including 3 miles out to the ocean. Then there are rumors that Sea Rays and SeaCrests belong in the sea, Key West belong in Key West, Yada Yada Yada. Then the hospitaliity industry is going to tell everyone the lakes are safe when in fact they are WRONG. It is no safer with a speed limit law. The MP are too busy to keep the 'Caption Boneheads' in line. If Captain Bonehead hit Bear Islander ot Bear Lover with his pontoon boat, I can see them screaming bloody blue Jeezus and send out a bill to ban pontoon boats!
That is what I am getting at!

Merry Christmas.

If you seriously think that was the reason, please let all know!! If yes, it will show your true feelings of the haves vs the have nots.

An observation and a Question
 

First, the observation. Excessive speed is easy to define! It's any speed at which you were unable to avoid a collision (and, I'd be happy to stretch that to include a "near miss", too!) If someone is unable to stop or turn their boat with plenty of room to spare,:eek: they're going too danged fast, period, no matter what the spedometer reading is!

Now, the question. Are any of the legislators involved with HB162 experienced boaters?

Silver Duck

"Help save lives and limbs..."
 

"Help save lives and limbs by supporting speed limit"
While waiting in my barber's today, I came across this letter to the editor sent in by a Nashua orthopedic surgeon in today's Laconia Sun, December 21.

"To the editor.

As an orthopedic surgeon serving the Greater Nashua community for many years and as a lifelong boater on our New Hampshire lakes, I strongly believe that the 45 mph (day) and the 25 mph (night) speed limits as put forth in House Bill 162 are critically needed. Seeing first hand how accidents can harm human life and limb and helping family members manage their injury rehabilitation have made me safety-minded and community-minded. With more and more boats being driven at excessive speed, boating on our lakes in New Hampshire has reached the danger level, for certain, and this bill will help preserve the safety of everyone.
Already, our family centered State has speed limits enforced by the NH Fish and Game and their radar guns on our backwoods trais to ensure the safety of hikers, snow shoers and cross-country skiers, side-by-side ATV's, dirt bikes and snowmobiles. Already, we have speed limits on our town roads to ensure the safety of those bicycling, roller blading, walking, jogging, and pushing baby strollers, side-by-side cars and trucks. It makes sense to do the same on New Hampshire's lakes to protect kayakers, swimmers, sailboaters, windsurfers, canoers, and rowers side-by-side motor boats.
The proposed 45 ph daytime speed limit is plenty fast enough to waterski and to boat from one end of a lake to the other, while allowing enough reaction and stopping time to prevent collisions with objects and other lake enthusiasts. The proposed 25 mph nighttime limit is plenty fast enough to move about at night but at much slower speeds to compensate for the vastly challenged visibility that darkness on water brings.
The New Hampshire House of Representatives will be addressing this bill in January. Please call, write or email your NH legislaturs before then and urge them to support House Bill 162 and the proposed 45/25 mph boating speed limits for New Hampshire. It will save somebody's life or limb.
Douglas Joseph M.D.
Nashua

Letters - The Laconia Daily Sun, Dec 21, 2005

safety certificate...HAA!!!
 

Do you really believe that the Boating Safety Certificate Law has helped tame inexperienced boaters?? Gimme a break! Any monkey with a laptop and a credit card can take the test anonymously over the internet (even for someone else other than themselves) and look up the answers while taking it. One might claim that at least at that point the material was read but was it really? This is no substitution for hands-on training in a boat. Why don't marinas offer a boat training course for hands-on experience when purchasing a boat? A 10 minute test ride to make sure it starts and runs is not sufficient. Do you really want to make the claim that this was solved and that speed is the true root of all evil???

While I do believe there is work to be done (online course in particular), many have taken the classroom course, I also believe it is working for a large percentage of boaters. I think its the reason, while boat registrations are up and the accidents are continuely going down. 95 in 2000 to 35 last year.

A National Boating Safety Alert recommended 3 things,
1. States should require PFDs for 12 and under. (Which I believe a new bill has been proposed for this) I support it.
2. States should implement a boating education certification program. We did that.
3. States should implement a boating license program. We don't do this. I personally would have no problem requiring boaters to "prove they know how to boat" before they get in one and drive it.

For the full report: http://www.ntsb.gov/alerts/sa%5F007.pdf

This is exactly what I am looking for. In class programs are decent, the internet one is far from it but having a hands-on training or test would definitely help.

What is Excessive Speed - and other comments on this topic
 

Lakegeezer did a great job illustrating that Excessive Speed can be 10 mph. Winnilaker and others also point out this flaw in the statistical interpretation. Excessive Speed is relative, it is not a specific number (like 45 mph).

I believe that the US Coast Guard survey includes all areas, not just Lakes similar to Winnipesaukee. Ocean boating is a bit different.

I can not go 45 mph in my boat (unless Columbus was wrong and I fall off the edge) but I do NOT favor any new Lake Speed restrictions.

IMHO: It's not how fast you go, it's how you go fast!

Seasons greetings :) .

Please don't expand my statements beyond what they clearly say.

All I said was that the Boating Safety Certificate address the issue of boater experience. How well it is working is open to discussion, however there is a law in place. When it comes to speed there is no law in place.

The certificate is better than nothing, at least it gives new boaters some kind of a clue. It also makes it harder to look a MP officer in the face and say "I never knew that!"

fatlazyless....

I do not get the point of this. This is just a letter. While I was at the barber shop today I read the USCG 2004 Boating Statistics report. You should look at it. This report as previous years shows no statistical reason for speed limits on our waterways. Please review the Vessel Information page regarding boat speed. Fewer vessels were involved in accidents at speeds over 40 mph than any other category including not moving once again, with 137 of the total 6,725 vessels in 2004 falling from 180 in 2003. USCG accident statistics should rank over some letter that expresses the opinion of one individual.

"With more and more boats being driven at excessive speed" - as an experienced boater he should know that excessive speed occurs at any speed and proposed limits therefore HB162 not reduce his income.

I read a tabloid while in line at the market once and a printed copy of a letter sent in from some Jack confirmed alien life forms working in Arizona.

The source is important when judging content.

Chase1 MD

If you will read that USCG report again you will find that MORE THAN HALF of all fatal boating accidents were at "Speed Unknown".

344 deaths in 2004 where the speed was unknown. Perhaps those boats were going so fast their speed could not be estimated.

And to be fair lets mention that these statistics are for ALL vessels, including row boats, kayaks, inflatable boats, canoes etc. When you take that into account, it's no wonder many fatal accidents are at low speed.

The only point is that it is in favor of the speed limit. Pasted below are all the letters not written to any editor from all the other area Orthopedic Surgeons that don't oppose the bill. Their silence is deafening and implies that they must oppose the speed limit.



















;)

Or perhaps their speed was irrelevant.

Lets assume for a moment that high speeds make it harder to estimate speed based on impact damage (they don't, common sense kinda prevails here); do you really believe the USCG would investigate a high speed accident and report nothing more than "speed unknown" if speed was so high that it could not be estimated? C'mon, that's quite a reach.

Doesn't the safe passage law address speed? Any distance within 150 of another boat limits speed to 6 mph or less.

Unknown speed distribution
 

Wish I had seen thess posts before I had typed my other reply, I could have saved some typing. So what's your point above ? Are you saying that all or most of the unknown speeds are above 40 mph ? Why would you believe that ? Seems to me that it's likely that the distribution of the unknown speeds pretty much follows the distribution of the known speeds. The percentages won't much change then. If you have some reason to belive otherwise please state it.

edit : FWIW the CG entry is for over 40 mph. Should those boats have been going "so fast that their speed couldn't be estimated" I'd think they would have been included in this category.
Investigator: How fast where they going ?
Response : I couldn't tell, it was too fast.
Investigator : [puts checkmark in over 40 box]

Your statement clearly stated that the issue had been addressed. I do not believe that the solution that was come up with addresses much of anything...I obviously have taken the test as have many others on this forum and I bet that I am speaking for many when I say that the test hardly scratches the surface in proper boater education. I do not believe that by simply taking the test a newbie boater is anywhere near ready to be on the water be it Winni, the ocean or in a puddle. Not to mention how easy it would be for someone to get a certificate without even doing it themselves...