Unsafe Boating - the real issue
 

As many of you are aware, I am a Bass fisherman and operate a high perfomance Bass Boat as well as a couple of other types of water craft.

I have inserted a copy of the text I posted on the site most frequently visited by Bass Anglers in the Northeast (www.nesportsman.com)
This is the message I posted:

In the past months there has been a great deal of posting on many sites regarding speed limits and opinions. Some of the issues discussed have been the NIMBY approach, some have defended bass boats, others have discussed the big motor go fast off shore type boats. There have been posts on some sites about big wakes = most of us know that the faster boats leave hardly any wake when on plane. Those that have smaller boats and take a beating from the big wakes are also targeting the go fast boats and clearly don't understand where the wakes are really coming from.

Now that the public hearing is behind us, the facts remain a bit cloudy. It's apparent that those who support speed limits have no real proof or grounds to impose the rules. Those that oppose the rules have many strong points.

Perhaps we should take a stand and consider approaching the legislature with some real recommendations that make sense.

The NH Marine Patrol has very limited funding and therefore, can't enforce the rules that already exist - at least not effectively. When you consider that the boat population on most of the big lakes (especially Winni) has more than doubled in the past 10 years and the Marine Patrol has increased a small percentage in the same period - the scale is way off balance. I am not proposing that we have a Marine Patrol boat around every corner, but there will never be an end to the issues until the patrol boats become more visible & effective.

The key issues that most of those who want a speed limit really boils down to unsafe passage issues. If marine patrol had funding to support a sufficient amount of enforcement officers, they would be better equipped to address the unsafe passage issue more effectively.

I don't care what type of watercraft your operating (Bass Boats included), if your on plane withing 150' of anything (another boat, shore, swim raft, etc.) your the guilty party.

We could go on forever casting blame on boat types and questioning the validity of those who support the request for a speed limit. This will make some of us feel better, but, nothing beneficial will come of it.

I think that our Bass fishing organizations(NEBA of NH, NH Bass Fed, MA Bass Fed, NBS, etc.) have sufficient constituents as well as a voice in Concord that is strong enough to propose a realistic solution to the issues.

A successful plan always includes 3 basic components: Problem (unsafe boaters), Solution (More effective law enforcement) and Benefit (a safer water body for all to enjoy as well as a reduction in accidents and environmental damages caused by improper boat operation).

Looking forward to your comments,

John/NH

The real issue
 

In my opinion the real issue is people are simply not courteous. No matter how many laws are on the books there will always be the 5% that ruin it for the rest of us. We need to keep this in mind in light of all the unsubstantiated stuff that has been going on at this site regarding speed limits etc...

The people who seem to have a problem with boating on Winni are alarmists. Boating on Winnipesaukee is fun. Don't let these few folks ruin it for the rest of us simply because they are narrow minded and miss informed or have an agenda. I believe those who have open minds are starting to realize this.

Good start in the right direction
 

I think this is a very sensible approach. However, more detail is needed for the solution.

What specific patroling and enforcement actions will be taken?
Are any new regulations needed (possibly not)?
How much money is required to fund these actions?
Where will the money come from?

As you suggest the Patrol's budget is limited and getting money in NH is always hard to do. It might be suggested that registration be increased but I would like to see assurances that the extra money be specifically allocated to the patrol activities outlined in answer to the first question above.

Another benefit would be that pesistant unsafe boaters might get the message that their actions are unwelcome and go elsewhere.

Great post JohnNH!
Something else that could help would be to give the tests back after it has been corrected.
That way you can learn what you didn’t know.
They may have already been fixed this since I took it three years ago. It's a scary thing if a person just barely passes the test!
When I have a minute, I’ll send them an e-mail. Guess that should have been done sooner. Oops. :blush:

Glad you brought this up John
 

My feelings are that all its going to take is one major incident with a bass boat or offshore type boat to give this type of legislation a lot of support. The marine patrol does a great job but they dont have the resources to afford sufficient coverage. They have approx 10 permanent enforcement and command personnel with approx 80 seasonal people.Thats not much when you consider how many waterbodies they cover. Director Barrett stated that Winnipesaukee can have 4-10 personnel on the lake during the summer. Doesnt seem like enough based on the size and number of users.Is it possible to pursue addtional funding for them through legilative action?. One thought I have is to form a group of individuals and or business interests to raise money in order to fund additional coverage dedicated to Winnipesaukee. I dont know if this is something that can be legally done but I do believe enough funds could be raised from the various user groups, individuals, and or businesses that have a serious interest in the safety of the lake. Would luv to hear any other opinions.

Hey, I have a great idea! It doesn’t have to cost much either. :idea:
Marine Patrol could come up with a training course. Then deputize us civilians. Then there would be plenty of coverage all over the lake.
Captain Bonehead will be a thing of the past. :laugh:
I haven't quite worked out the overabundance of blue lights yet. :confused:

Great idea RG but....
 

I would break a rule just to have you chase me...lol.. you would hafta get FormulaOutlaw to give ya a ride just to have a chance of catching me...lol :laugh:

I don't know RG, with all the blue lights, might end up being more like a huge water wonderland KMart with specials going on all over the place. Might even get FLL out of a WallyWorld. http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/7/7_18_4.gif

Some thoughts to ponder
 

Gee JohnNH, sounds like you're actually trying to accomplish something :) I'm going to suggest what I think are some constructive thoughts, hopefully w/o derailing your effort. Before approaching Concord with a plan I would first ask that the problem, or top X problems be identified. Saying that unsafe boaters is the problem is a little vague to me and might not be the top issue for most of us on Winni. What I'm suggesting* is that "we all" make a top 3 (or 5 or 10) list of specific items which we think are problematical. I wouldn't over-analyze these at this moment, but rather just list them. As an example if you think large cruisers are a problem, don't say large cruisers but rather the specific thing (or attribute) that they do (or have) that is the issue. An example might be large wakes are a problem. Better yet you might say rough ride due to boat wakes (large wakes, from large cruisers). Later on "we all" can further assess and analyze the root causes (though feel free to add what you think the RC is). Collecting all our lists into 1 list, "we" can then pick out which of those problems are those we can, or care to, address. Then knowing what the issues are, researching the causes and contributors "we" can brainstorm (some more) ideas as to how to solve those deemed worthy of attention (this may or may not involve Concord). If you like the results then you and your associated organizations can present, to those guys in Concord, what you think their part of the solution is. Perhaps the organizations you mention, and some others not mentioned, might do something not involving legislation. Who knows :D

For me, I don't think what I would deem as unsafe boating is the major issue (an issue just not my #1) facing me on Winni. I see more rude/inconsiderate/thoughtless boating than I do unsafe boating. Reducing the occurance of what I list below, examples of RITB, would greatly improve my boating experience.

Failing to "keep right" is perhaps my #1 rude action (yes folks, I'm a broken record**). Time after time I come off-plane because some bonehead is coming down the bay on the "wrong" side. I'm left with no option since I'm constrained by the shore on my starboard and left with crossing his/her path (not smart) as the other choice. Some forethought by Capt B would have placed him more out in the bay, further from shore thus allowing both he (if he would deign to follow the rules) and I to remain on-plane.

#2 rude action is people not organizing themselves into a pattern when traffic is high. I see 3 - 4 boats more or less abreast of each other, all going about the same speed impeding traffic either trying to around them or past them in the opposite direction. In those areas where other boats have to pass you (or you pass them), I wish people would look around and integrate themselves into a flow that allows others to operate too. (analogy = people walking 2 - 3 abreast down road with traffic going both ways).

#3 rude action is a variant of the former in that when converging with other boats to a spot (ie a channel ) people refuse to think/plan ahead and instead plow ahead (sometimes race) to be the first to wait. Along the way if there's not an ROW violation, there's usually some consternation as people jockey for position. (analogy = coming to toll booths)

None of the above is what I would deem unsafe nor against the written rules but reducing their number would please me (and I suspect others too). Perhaps all of the above could be lumped into 1 group titled rude boating but maybe there are solutions specific to each so I list them separately. If I were to add 2 more for a top 5 list they might be rough ride due to wakes (multiple causes) and ROW violations (people don't know or ignore the rules of the road). Lack of space at public docks might even tie with ROW violations.

What, if anything, should or could be done about the above I'll remain silent on for now. Indeed others may have things I didn't recall, or cause me to rethink my prioritization. More than likely the majority will have differing ideas as to what problem(s) should be addressed. You might wish to narrow people's inputs to only those things which they think are unsafe (your original idea I believe) or widen it to include world peace or have a list of issues in-between these 2 extremes (you make the call here). But a list of problems, to be culled in the future, is what I would suggest as a starting point for constructive action. Understanding the problems, root causes and solutions follow later.

*This is your thread, if you think I'm pushing it somewhere you'd rather not go then let me know. ;)

**for the kids reading this, I'm a stuck & repeating CD :D

How do we do it?
 

Valid points but how do you change the way people behave short of a 2X4 across the head to get their attention? From what I see it is not excessive speed or the size of a boat but a lack of consideration for the other person. Its the you first AFTER me mentality that seems to prevail.

I don't know how many times we have had to slow down while towing a skier or wake boarder to allow someone to cut across in front of us or were sitting picking up a fallen skier only to have a boat fly by with in the 150' limit.

How about mounting 50 calibers on the bow and allowing warning shots across the bow of a vessle that does not obey the rules? Of coarse, only rubber bullets will be allowed. ;)

I think the overall thoughts here have the roots to the problem, and then it boils down to noncompliance with the well-loved but oft-times abused 150 foot rule.

Eat my dust, follow my taillights, vanity plates "2fast4U", and other types of road mentalities follow over to the water. Some of it is education, some is poor judgement, and the rest probably just plain arrogance or lack of respect for others on the water.

I avoid the Weirs area by boat except before mid-june weekdays and post Labor day weekdays. It just isn't worth the hassle to try to get dock space or to go thru the channel to head down to that French restaurant Roi Burger. Some folks don't seem to understand that the No Wake area may have to extend out from the first sign, so when I slow down to get behind the boat in front of me who has slowed down to get behind the boat in front of him who has slowed... and then some yahoo(s) go flying by on a plane, or even worse with the nose way up high, the stern way down low and a wake larger than the Mount's, all the time looking at you like you and the others in front have three heads for going so slow outside a no wake area. (Mrs Bell, one of my English teachers would probably have my head for that last sentence... Sorry Mrs. B)

Solution: Gtxriders 50 cal with rubber bullets in the bow??? 105 howitzer shooting last year's Halloween pumpkin???? Or maybe Education, Common Sense, Courtesy (ever held the door open for someone else and let them go first???? gets a lot of smiles and "thanks, have a good day"), Safety for you and others, and when that fails or is not effective, Enforcement...Increased presence by the Marine Patrol, even better training of those on the lake to enforce, and respect for those who are out on the lake doing the enforcement.

Forums like this Forum (not just this thread) can be a great educational tool. I was talking to a sailboater who was talking about powerboaters cutting across his bow rather close. He said he didn't have to alter his course (not that close) but the boat could have easily gone astern as opposed to going across the bow (the boat had altered course to give way to the sailboat under sail...a good thing). When I questioned him as to what the difference was (across the bow vs passing astern), he said (and subsequent conversations with a couple of other sailboaters) that he (they) would prefer the giveway boat to pass astern if it was a choice bow vs stern. He didn't say they should alter course dramatically to pass astern, only that if it was a simple choice, choose the stern route. Has to do with the slow speed, pitching up and down in the wake. I thought and always tried to pass to the bow of a sailboat, even if it meant taking a pretty good turn to pass well out in front. Now I try to pass to the stern, and give even greater space as well. this is only the opinion of a few sailboaters, but it seemed to be consistent and I felt I learned something that isn't covered by RSA whatever. Falls under courtesy, I guess.

Oops, just a little more than my two cents this morning.

Rattlesnake Gal
 

From some of the talk I've observed around the lake I believe the on line boater course is a complete waste of time. Everyone should be required to attend the class. I've heard all kinds of stories of people getting around the test by having someone else take it or get together in groups. Nothing is gained or learned from this. I also think there should be a refresher course every few years as rules change that many of us are never aware of.
Maybe some of these ideas could help promote a better understanding of what the problems are out there.
I'm an owner of one of those 70 mph boats who has never been pulled over of cited on the lake. I'd like to believe I've not violated any rules but there are times when you just want to distance yourself from the crowd and it's just not possible when everyone around you is traveling at headway speed.
Another idea that has been talked about is making a large no wake zone in the Wiers area. A lot of us would like to see one like the one placed in Meredith. The boats get trashed at the docks almost all day and night at the wiers.

BR, good point on the Weirs...you can almost make a point for no wake from GI Bridge to Spindle Point and thenover to where the new Marina is going in...Well maybe a little extreme, but I certainly would like to see no wake on either side of Eagle Island, and perhaps from Flashing # 1 to over near where the new Marina will be...Very much like Merideth...I thought the Merideth one would be a little excessive until I sat back and enjoyed the views. An expanded Weirs No Wake could be just as enjoyable. http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/7/7_3_200.gif

BR,I wholeheartedly agree with you on the online test. The class is the only way to go. Time well spent.
A refresher course is a great idea too.
Extending the no wake zone at The Weirs would be wonderful! While they’re at it, they should consider making it a no tow zone.
What are people thinking? Towing a tube or skier over there is like playing Russian roulette!
Maybe they just don’t like their kids and want to get rid of them. :confused:

upthesaukee,
I never thought about passing to the stern of a sailboat, but it makes perfect sense. Thanks for the post. I always consider it an added bonus when I learn something from this forum.

Twin 50 BMGs
 

I don't know the answer, yet. Perhaps there is no answer short of a 2x4 and then again who knows. There's a lot of people here on this forum and never underestimate the ability of a dedicated group. First though "we" should have some agenda of what the issues are and which "we" might choose to tackle. No doubt changing the mentality above is a tall order but what if 20% of the Capt B's changed their ways ... how about even 10% ... perfection shouldn't stand in the way of better. Then again perhaps the majority thinks "speeding" is the issue, for now I won't comment except to say let everyone have their say w/o worrying whether a solution is feasible or even possible.

ps - as for twin 50's -- I've often thought the same but now I'm thinking stealth. Warning shots, smarwning shots. How about small torpedo's, discretely dropped over the side and guided to the offending vessel ;) Warhead just large enough to hole the sucker, not enough to cause mass distruction. I used to do missile work, torpedos aren't that much different :D

Small tomahawk?
 

Ya,

A small non-explosive Tomahawk or Cruise Missile just below or at the water line might do the trick.

Of course I am a nonviolent person. ;)

Obit for our missing Friend ...
 

I ran across the following in another forum and found it amusing enough that I thought I should pass it along ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Obituary


...to mourn the passing of a beloved old friend by the name of Common Sense who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic Red Tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such value lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm and that life isn't always fair.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not kids, are in charge). His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intentioned but over bearing regulations were set in place.

Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student; but, could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Finally, Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, she spilled a bit in her lap, and was awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason.

He is survived by two stepbrothers; My Rights and Ima Whiner.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.

Obituary
 

Oh, M-n-M thanks for sharing that! So very true, and as sad an obit as I've ever read! I'd like to have it blown up to poster size and framed!

Great Post M-n-M


I think he also had a "cuz" named I. Can and another "cuz" I. Wanted II.

Maybe we will find out that reincarnation actually does exist, and C. S. will return, hopefully as himself (or herself)(certainly want to be P. C.).

Hopefully he will return in time for the summer.

It's not just your standard test any more.
 

Just as big truckers are scrutinized more thoroughly in their tests than automobile drivers are, so should the Big Boater.

A formula needs to be devised for the tests that adds additional -- and increasingly difficult -- questions relating to speed and weight on the water.

The additional questions can be indexed to each additional foot over 24 feet of the registered boat, with a multiplier for the number of engines, each ton of weight, and other parameters.

The Big Boater can be rewarded with a special "NH Lakes" decal indicating proficiency in boating knowledge. The decal can be revoked upon receiving a ticket and covered over with another decal indicating revocation.

Size does NOT matter!
 

Sorry to disagree, but the size of the boat has no correlation to the ability of the operator. I have seen small boaters do some dumb things and have seen large boats operated in a responsible manner.

On the road I have seen the professional driver (truckers) do the same bone head moves as the idiots in the little rice burners (sorry for being PI).

There is a turn on Rt.95 (northern terminus of the NJTP) getting on to Rt. 80 where the Big Rigs drivers always lay the trucks on their sides. They do not under stand the need to slow down on turns.

What a great post M-n-M! Wow, so true and so fitting!

My grandfather taught me many rules of common sense towards other boaters. (He didn't always follow them himself LOL!) I've known for years that 150 is the distance you need to know, and how that small or helpless (LOL) craft always has the right of way, and by age 20+, it should be pounded into your head as pure COMMON SENSE! DUH!

Some recommendations to consider
 

I don't know all the answers. Heck I don't even know all the questions but I'll toss out an idea or three for debate. First while NH's Boater Ed program is a start I'm not convinced it'll accomplish much. What I see is a (maybe even the) problem is that it's waaay too easy for someone to "bone up" for the test and then flush that knowledge away before they're back on the lake. If knowledge of the basic rules of the road is part of the problem then I don't see the present course solving it. Coming back to my schooling I do see some help though. To this day I can still do simple math (8x6=48) w/o a calculator because it was burned into my brain though (seemingly) endless repetition. While "rote" learning is frowned upon these days, I do think it can help pound the basic rules into even Capt B's head. Therefore I'll suggest making the boating course mandatory every 2 (??) years so even boating newbies can get sufficient *exposure* so that they'll learn despite themselves. Now even I groan at this but given you can do the course online (? perhaps just as a refresher ?) ... I guess an hour every 2 years isn't that much. Even better, make the online course free and you'll remove another reason not to take it.

Along the same lines I'll steal an idea that someone else has posted before. Why not post the basic rules at each public ramp along with a buoy 150' out from the ramp. You might catch some of the out of state boaters and infuse them with some knowledge. In this endeavor the signage will need to be creative so it'll get noticed and read. I don't know how this might be done but I think it's possible. Not than many years ago I used to fly quite a bit for job reasons. Believe me when you've flown >60k miles in a year you get used to tuning out the safety briefing and yet I can recall with vividness one time the flight attendant on the Pittsburg to Bristol flight did her routine ... in a non-routine manner. With an overdone Southern drawl she said "In the event of an emergency the oxygen will deploy from the overhead compartment. First I want you to pray that our pilot Jimmy-Bob hasn't had too much to drink today and then, and only then, pull on the ..." Suffice it to say because it was so amusing even the jaded business travelers listened. I don't know how to do this on a sign but I'll bet some creative type does.

Next, as I've said previously, I'm not sure out-right unlawful and/or unsafe behavior is the biggest problem. Assuming the problems I've ranted about comes from ignorance or thoughtlessness, I would suggest adding a section to the boating course titled etiquette. The topic is not the laws but rather the unwritten rules we follow. I'm less sure how to present the information but perhaps videos depicting Capt B behavior and then what a more thoughtful boater would have done. As above the key is presentation. Officer Bob preaching about safety & niceness won't get remembered. John Cleese in a mocking diatribe about Capt B just might be. If the lack of boating etiquette is due to some larger societal rudeness issue, no training, nor any law enforcement efforts will bear much fruit. You can't force the majority to do something they really don't want to do; you can only hope to remind them of their better natures (to paraphrase Lincoln).

Lastly I throw out 1 idea for those who think some form of legislation and policing action just has to be done. I've opined previously that, at times, congestion lies at the root of a lot of boating problems. Short of reducing the number of boats allowed on the lake what can be done ? In the car world, even when the numbers can't be reduced, you can help by managing the flow better. Could Winni adopt a counter-clockwise flow rule ? All boats with X feet of the (land) shore must go in a counter-clockwise direction unless traveling at NWS. This (assuming people would obey) would tend to segregate boats going in opposite directions from each other, just as we do in channels. Exactly what number X is and how to handle traffic flow around islands and potentially other issues I'll leave open for discussion. This is more of an off the top of my head idea and so I toss it into the forum for your comment and/or amusement. I will say that if boat traffic moved more smoothly, w/o having to come off then on then off then on plane, boaters would be happier.

Do we need new laws?
 

Dear Mee-n-Mac

Be careful of what you ask for. You just might get it!

The Lake is only truly congested two days a week, ten weeks a year. And only in certain "choke points" Wiers, Alton Bay, etc.

If a law is passed mandating certain traffic paterns on the Lake we will be stuck with it on a Tuesday afternoon in September.

But you have some good thoughts. Thanks for the input.

Misty.

Dear Mee-n-Mac

Great post to get people thinking about the possible components of a solution.
I think that the 150 ft rule probably gets lost on the noise of a boating course. It's a bit unique (I think) to NH and with all the other information in the course it's importance is diluted. However, most posts seem to suggest it is a significant part of the unsafe boating problem. If operators would keep to headway speeds when closer than 150 ft, many of these problems would go away. I like the rule posting idea but I think it should be limited to a few major rules. When I see something posted, if I can't ready the major points from about 20 feet away I don't usually bother (think road signs). Some catchy slogan would be useful.
I think that without enforcement no progress will be made. A majority of people will push rules if they think they can get away with it, especially if they see others getting away with it. Most of the time there are no serious repercussions to bad boating behavior, just ticked off strangers. I think it takes quite a bit of personal discipline to keep doing the right thing when so many others ignore the rules and nothing happens. The lack of enforcement also cheapens the importance of the rule. Oh well, if no one is enforcing it, it must not be very important.
I really had a chuckle over the counter-clockwise rule. :laugh: If we can't get people to slow down when they are simply near someone do you think there is much hope of getting them all going in counter-clockwise patterns? :) The enforcement for this would be like herding cats.
I think we need to teach it (with emphasis on a few major rules), post it (constant reminder of the important rules), and enforce it (yes, we really mean it, these rules are important).

Acres per second
 

What you say could be valid if the problems on the lake were reserved to the large go fast boaters.
Last time I inquired the majority of boat accidents and violations were handed out to Joe family boater with his wife and 2 kids in a boat in the 19-22' range. Now I do notice more and more Joe boneheads in the big cruisers than I did a couple of years ago but the fast performance boats while they do get talked about did have less violations then any other boat on the lake.
Maybe because many of these drivers are more aware of their surroundings.
I'm all for more education getting rid of the wasted on-line test and refresher courses every few years.

Me-n-mac's clockwise suggestion made me think of the one real bad area of the lake which is the weirs channel to Eagle Island zone.This can be a real interesting if not frightening ride on some weekends with boats coming from all directions at different speeds.How about sort of a one way through one side of Eagle and the opposite way on the other side of Eagle in the counter-clockwise direction?It would however create some interesting cross traffic for boats coming from Merideth past Eagle,intercepting boats headed towards the weirs from the north side of Governors.Probably not a good idea.How about a giant round-a-bout around Eagle Island.Now that would be cool! SS

Counter Clockwise won't work
 

Counter clockwise traffic won't work. Here's why:

Which way does it go, which way does it go??????????

In addition to "enhanced testing",
 

Improvement #2:

Registration numbers need to be twice as big as present.

Not so that others may read them more readily, but so that the targeted boater knows that others can read them.

Also, they should be placed so they can be read from the shore. Some miscreants put their numbers right at the flared rub-rail where only a rock bass, looking up from the surface, could read it. :rolleye1:

Notice that the MPs don't ask for boat numbers any more?

Eagle Island One Way
 

Larger numbers would be helpful for when MP catches up to the boneheads we report. They’d know they have the right one!
Siksukr’s idea of one ways over at Eagle Island sounds intriguing. :idea: What are the drawbacks to this?

MP and those who rent watercrafts
 

I might as well enter my 2 cents worth.
I've been on this lake for over 40 years and I find the biggest problems comes from those who rent watercrafts and new watercraft owners. These people do not know the laws, regulation and 'rules of the road'. One PWC renter was killed a while ago because he zipped in front of a boat speeding out of the Weirs Channel. Definitely a no brainer!
I would like to see that renters and new watercraft owners pass a boater's safety course before they venture out. That will cut down the number of unsafe boating.
Based on my experience with the MP last summer, the MP needs to train their people. I posted somewhere on this forum where the MP did not know the basis of night lights: What is an anchor light and what lights should be on when headway. :confused:

Rotary around Eagle Is
 

Someone suggested this a couple years ago on this forum (was it you?) and I was thinking of this when I made my suggestion. CC rotation is used on other smaller lakes and is one way of making traffic flow (and would also mitigate my pet peeve). Of course you could just put some buoys down in those few places where traffic is the worst and try to direct flow like you would with traffic cones. This was my first thought but I didn't suggest it because I figured people would object to the extra cost of some more lighted buoys. I do wonder though ... if you do as you suggest above and also had some traffic buoys in the Weirs area .. might it not alleviate the problems there. BR has often suggested a NWZ (of some size ?) for the Weirs and while that might help I'm not sure if there's not a better way. There are sea lanes to help deal with traffic on the ocean, perhaps the concept has merit in some places on Winni too. I think rotaries (on land) do work and make sense on the water where you can't set-up traffic lights. Just for fun if I find some loose time, and a chart, I'll sketch up some positions and expected flow patterns. If anything looks like it has potential I'll post a pic (then we can have some real fun tearing it to shreds :) )

And just to be controversial let me suggest above removing some of the underwater rock hazards. :eek: Perhaps the last black tipped buoy off Eagle (towards Pitchwood I) could then be removed and the traffic lane widened and the zig-zag removed (though it would be less fun).

Herding cats - just 1 more reason to be a dog person
 

Always happy to bring some laughs to the forum :D Like I said I tossed that idea out "raw". I have oft wondered if putting some buoys down the middle of the bays most affected with "keep right" signs wouldn't work as well or better. But as Misty Blue points out above I didn't want a rule that wasn't needed ... hmmm ... when it wasn't needed. Keeping a free zone down the middle of a bay allows it to be used like a "zipper lane", unlike my buoy approach. I do think that if traffic flows better then most cats, err people, will follow it. People generally prefer to move, even if slowly, but constantly rather than sit in stop-n-go traffic. Maybe the same urge would keep most of the herd following the path. Most people do understand the "keep right rule" in a channel so I have some (meager) hope. Moreover I hoped that just kicking around some ideas as how to organize traffic flow might stimulate better concepts than I've proposed. :coolsm:


An aside for Misty Blue - I agree with you and my biggest foible with the CC concept is what happens in those areas where islands are in close proximity to the shore. Perhaps the right value for X mitigates most problem areas but then again perhaps it's not a tenable concept (? except in certain places ?) I do find that my training, that a port-port passing is strongly preffered, has me following this rule almost instinctively when I get into traffic areas.

Houston, we have a problem
 

Oh no ... my watch is solar powered. What'll I do at night time ? What was I thinking ?!? :sleeping: Maybe I should have said anti-CD spin ? :p Of course the kids with flash (or HD based) MP3 players won't know this one either ... aarrggg ;) Perhaps I should have said anti-the_way_water_goes_down_the drain_hole but then the Aussies visiting the lake would be going the wrong way. Thats IT I give up ! :laugh:

I like it
 

Actually, through all the humor and poking fun, there is certainly a lot of merit to some traffic flows, especially in the more congested areas. When I first started power boating as an adult on the lake, it wasn't all that long ago...the late 70's. Dad had a 17' Thompson I/O and when we would come back down Alton Bay heading back to the dock, he always said keep well to the right, especially at night. We would go past Little Mark flasher, heading to the left of Bayside Motel until we picked up Echo Pt flasher. Then it was Sandy Point Restaurant til we picked up the Sandy Point flasher. Keep it close to the flasher and head for the right side of the bandstand. Seemed natural, like driving a car. Same principal going in and out of Wolfeboro, down to Merideth, going down to Moultonboro...keep to the right and pass with care. Of course things were less crowded then, but I still see the principals working these days.

Just reread this post and almost seems like morals charges are about to be brought!!! :laugh:

Looks like we need to educate, enforce, re-educate, re-enforce, and when all else fails, bring out the heavy equipment!!! http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/1034.gif

Change The Fee Schedule
 

Improvement #3:

Today's registration fees are anachronistic.

I pay more for a 16-foot sailboat (low-impact) than my smaller powerboat (high-impact). Winnipesaukee's unpowered sailboats were once registration-free, although most probably don't recall that.

If I buy Ellen MacArthur's new, but used-up trimaran sailboat (about to complete circling the globe in 72 days, non-stop, solo), it won't be the first 75-foot boat on Winnipesaukee. But it will be the first 75-foot-WIDE boat on Winnipesaukee.

Now add the required 150-foot buffer fore, aft, and to each side. (Remember that this buffer travels with the boat).

Even with scant wind velocity, my new trimaran will be using up nearly two acres of the Lake's precious boating acres: Even more area when really travelling.

A new fee-schedule needs to be derived: A formula that takes into account the surface area of the Lake that an individual boat "uses up" -- not simply boat length, which always remains static.

(Try L x HP x W).

Length X Horsepower X Width will adjust the MP's enforcement budget appropriately, too.

Even more creative enhanced-fee schedules are out there.



#1 was Education enhancement.
#2 was Registration numbers-enhancement.
#3 is Registration Fee enhancement.

After reading the entire posting in this chain, I think we can all agree that it’s obvious that a clear answer to the unsafe boating problem doesn't exist.

I have been thinking about ways to address the problem.

Let's discuss this one:

As we all know, there is a requirement that by a certain date, we all have to take the boaters safety course (and I agree that the on-line course is a joke). Once we have taken the course, we all receive this official looking card that provides registered proof that we are in compliance with the regulation. Some people actually think this document is a license.

In the event that you are not in compliance with the regulation, you MAY get a ticket and be forced to take the course + pay a fine. Many people will say "Big Deal", and continue boating.

If we all think about this, you might ask yourself when was the last time you’ve been stopped by Marine Patrol? Personally, I have been stopped three times in my entire boating life = 42 years of boating. The first time was to warn me that I had passed a marker on the wrong side and the officer wanted to tell me about the hazard; (this was on Ossipee Lake about 10 years ago). The second time was in Winter Harbor about 4 or 5 years ago and the officer asked me if he could inspect my boat – he did and everything was in order. The third time was on Winnisquam and the officer (part time summer help) told me I was speeding – I asked him if I had passed anyone unsafely and he said no; I had to remind him that I was not speeding since there was no speed limit in the main part of the lake and he agreed and went on his way – note; I was traveling about 55 mph.

My point here is that unless there is a sufficient penalty in a regulation, there is no reason for the irresponsible boaters to have any concern for the rules.

Potential Solution:

Any boat operator should be required to hold a boaters license and actually take a so-called road test. With an actual license requirement, boaters that break the rules get tickets under the same points system that is in place on the states highways. If you build up to many points, yes you lose your boating license, but is this enough? If the boating license is tied to your motor vehicle driver’s license and the points are applied to both, perhaps this would be sufficient cause for boaters to abide by regulations. I am not truly in favor of more laws, however, a law like this would have NO impact on safe boaters.

Last item for now:
Again, in my opinion: The suggested implementation of controlled traffic patterns will only move the problem to another area of the lake and pass the problems off to others.

John/NH

JohnNH
 

Some interesting ideas John. One thing I am not sure it would work or how it would work, tieing/tying in ones boaters license to their drivers license for boaters with out of state licenses. You have to get Registry of Motor vehicle depts from other states to comply, many will for drivers licenses but I suspect they would not extend that to NH boating licenses. Maybe someday if all states were on board with this idea.

However, the boaters licence & affecting the privilege to operate on NH waters when violations are commited is an interesting idea. Maybe the fee for the licence could hire additional personnel because with such a large undertaking additional officers for enforcement will be needed & additional personnel will be needed for the examinations.

John N/H
 

John, as usual some good thoughts on your part. One simple question, how do you propose your and others suggestions be implemented? Allot of discussion IMO with no implementation plan.

Town of Alton has come up with a radical plan to control boat traffic in Alton bay and will be a warrant article at this year's town meeting. All traffic in the bay must be headed out the bay....and we'll let Wolfeboro worry about it!!!:D

Fine structure
 

I don't disagree with the concept of a license, which could be revoked after multiple infractions as is done in the auto world. Ditto on the "road test". I would add that increasing the fines for repeated infractions should also be done. Like Propeller I'm not sure how practical it would be link boating and auto "points".

Upthesaukee
 

Your post reminds me of a story that made the news a few years ago in Maine.
When the expansion of I-95 from the tolls North to Portland was in the planning stages and older downeaster gentleman was quoted in the news article:

He said:
I-95 is already 4 lanes. Lets save the tax money and make the road 1 lane Northbound and 3 lanes Southbound.

Sounds like your post ???

Note, I am not suggesting your an older downeaster gentleman.

John/NH

JohnNH
 

Actually, it is a paraphrase of an anonymous comic (anonymous 'cause I am getting to the point where I don't remember who said what lo those many years ago...) who in the course of his act was complaining about the traffic in NYC. He said it was simple...make all the streets one way southbound and let Jersey worry about it...

So you caught me with an unoriginal thought...I hang my head in shame... http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_13_14.gif

Well, it's clear to me:
 

Depends on what you consider "the problems". :rolleye1:

Every year for the last three years, there has been at least one major crash involving GFBL boats. (Go Fast Be Loud.

A 38-foot Lightning lost control, caught his own swim-platform, and flipped. It tore off his swim platform and tossed six thrill-seekers into Winnipesaukee. Later, another GFBL did the same thing.

Caught his swim platform? What boats on the lake can even attempt that?

That "Fountain in the trees?". That boat had 2 hours on it, and was bought with the insurance proceeds from his first boat -- which he also destroyed.

In only those 3 years, about 20 Winnipesaukee boaters have gotten thrown out, badly shaken up, or sued -- and one was crushed to death -- all due to GFBL Big Boats. GFBL boaters just say, "nobody drowned". Of the 110,000 other boats sharing New Hampshire's waters none get these kinds of headlines.

And it's going to happen again.

There should be demonstrable skills-testing at their highest speed.

But that won't happen.

A sliding scale of enhanced fees, enhanced written-testing for boats over 24 feet, and enhanced numbers -- all of which can use existing New Hampshire infrastructure -- will help turn this weekend madness around.

I've reviewed all 58 of BoaterEd's forum pages, and all of BoatUS forum pages. The bottom line among America's most active year-around boaters? One word:

Enforcement.

Not written tests, not licenses, not twin-50s, not speed limits, not counter-clockwise circulation, not Internet-testing, not skills-testing:

Enforcement.

What is the Marine Patrol's litany?

"We don't have the funds".

Well, enhance the existing penny-ante fee-schedule for the amount of lake that a boat actively uses (LxWxHP, or acres/second), "Learn" the GFBL Big Boaters some sense through aggressively-written tests, and enlarge the numbers.

It was here a minute ago...Where's my #%€¥þleeping wand?!?!?

Dave Barrett, Director of Safety Services and head of the Marine Patrol, testified in front of the House RR&D committee last month that there has not been a single speed-related incident on the lake in several years, that there is no speed that is unsafe for the lake no matter how fast, and that there is no correlation between high speed and safety in a marine environment.

Gimmee a break
 

I would like to see the direct quote becasue that is simply untrue. When the GOFAST boats overturn in the process of taking a highpeed turn I would say that is a result of speed. Gimmee a break

That does not make any sense at all.

I agree with you, but I am just repeating what he said at the hearing.
I recall at least two cases just last year alone where boats travelling at very high speeds flipped over while out all alone(one on the Broads at over 90 and one in Alton at over 70), yet I guess those were not "speed related" by his standards. :confused: There might be a recording of the RR&D hearing available somewhere...does anybody know?
You may recall that Director Barrett also testified a couple of years ago that a proposed no-wake zone for Center Harbor, like the one in Meredith Bay, would actually impair safety rather than improve it, because the no-wake markers would create safety hazards while there was no evidence that headway travel was any safer. :confused:
I'm just the messenger.

As memory serves me right, both of those incidents involved the boat being put through some radical or severe or tight turns, and I suppose that if that was the case, the proximate cause was more the turning (what would possibly be considered by some as a reckless operation...my thought actually) as opposed to the speed itself being the cause. Speed may then be considered a "contributing factor". I guess we would have to see the "accident report" to see how it was written up to see where Director Barrett gets his information.

I would also question the "any speed is safe" point of view. I can certainly drive a car around NHIS, and would be comfortable driving a properly equipped car at a fairly high rate of speed. I would also believe that if I tried to drive that car at a speed that the NASCAR drivers do, I would probably be unsafe. Similarly, those who feel that they could run at the speeds of a "Miss Budweiser" probably would lack the training to safely handle those speeds. I hope that common sense will prevail for those with the boats capable of very high rates of speed and we won't have our "first" accident due to speed.

Sorry Frank
 

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...cons/icon7.gif
Did not mean to kill the messenger.

I saw a GOFAST boat 2 years ago that sank after attempting a high speed turn. The boat and driver would have done fine at a slower speed but the speed sure was a factor.



I really wish people could get on the same page and protect the resource and peoples safety so that everyone can enjoy.

That's not going to happen as long as we have a DoS that feels the way it does about speeding. While ALL other law enforcement agencies (land and marine) subscribe to the theory that "speed kills", the MP clearly holds that speed is irrelevant to safety, and actively lobbies on the side of speeding at every opportunity. against that obstacle, why would anything ever change? :(

Most of the serious accidents (barrell-roll flips) have been due to people lacking the knowledge on how to properly handle a step-hull design in a performance boat. Or just plan carelessness...One of the incidents involved the owner of Silver Sands on a test ride with a potential customer in a fountain. This information came from the owner of another major dealer on the lake, a friend of his. Of all the people that should know how to handle one I would assume that the dealer should. Last year I also saw numerous people doing watersports (tubing/skiing/wakeboarding) in major channels/thruways. Weekend warriors in the middle of the buoys in Alton Bay, between Sleepers and the sand bar, etc. Total disregard for the safety of their passengers, people being towed behind the boat and others using the lake. Pick a cove! A quiet spot! Why in the middle of the damn lake???

Mixed feelings, here
 

I read today that two insurance companies, Blackadar and St. Louis, are no longer insuring "performance boats". (At $5000 per year, I might add).

What happens to Winnipesaukee when these boats are in the hands of those who can "afford" no insurance? :confused:

But back to enhanced testing/licensure of oversized and GFBL boats.

One test question comes to mind:

What do you do when one of your GFBL switches "goes soft"?

1) Set the other side to match and continue.
2) Stop, remove the switch, and crimp the wires together when needed.
3) Return to your home port at reduced speed.
4) Live with it -- it's a weekend anyway -- no repair shop is open.

Blackadar will not insure any boat that traves over 50mph no matter what it is. I have a 32' twin engine bowrider/cruiser that according the the mfg is good for 58mph, even though it is really a family boat they would not touch it. BoatUS was by far the best deal and did not really care.