No Wake Zone permit
 

Can anyone give me advise as to how to start the process of applying for a No Wake zone? We live on Lake Winni in Meredith and our little cove is being overrun by cigarette boats with no regard to speed or noise limits. I had to pile rocks up against our beach to try to stop the irrosion. We also had the Loon Preservation Society set up a loon raft in our cove to encourage our two resident loons to try to start a family.

I tried going on the Marine Patrol website but could not find any forms. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

ralbaneze

http://i44.tinypic.com/1499wms.gif ralbaneze, I was just browsing through the forum and noticed that you are fairly new to posting on the forum after joining back in Nov. 2014. We are glad that you have come aboard and joined us. Have fun and enjoy the Winni Forum while making many new friends.:)

http://i54.tinypic.com/2e56yqf.gif

You might be in violation of shoreline rules and regulatons by doing so. I hope member shore things will chime in on this.

It starts by getting a petition for what restriction you are interested in getting.

This is what you do:

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/...270/270-12.htm

Care to share what little cove you are suggesting needs a no wake zone?

Cummings Cove off of Oak Island

no wake till 150 foot from shore is the law
 

You may get a lot of opposition if word gets out about the no wake petition. Most successful ones are approved before people catch wind of it. :eek:

Darn those noisy boats.
 

Why haven't you asked MP to enforce the speed limit on the GFBL boats in your cove?

Gfbl?
 

Go Fast Be Loud? How'd I do?

Is Cummings Cove the whole cove between Meredith Neck and Stonedam and Pitchwood or just the little cove behind Oak Island? The cove behind Oak is probably already mostly no wake because of the 150' rule. If the whole cove is your target, then you will meet opposition.

Call the Marine Patrol, they will walk you through the process.

What's the over/under on number of posts before this turns ugly ends up in the dungeon?

Nice job!!

It is just the little cove behind Oak Island. We never see Marine Patrol in there.

Go fast
 

you bought the land and the house , the rest of us own the lake . Slow = no fun
Fast = lotta fun . I love going fast in that cove

Ok I'll ask how fast can a GFBL go in Cummings cove. I spend a lot of time there. It is not even large enough for a GFBL to get on plane. The only boats going fast are the residents waterskiing/tubing. I have been asked to move to the side so I am not in their way.

How long have you ownedd propery there? Have others in the cove complained to the MP in the past?

Well, it's a big lake and you're located very close to the busiest part of it. Boat wakes are a part of enjoying the lake, welcome to the forum.

http://i44.tinypic.com/1499wms.gif ralbaneze, I was just browsing through the forum and noticed that you are fairly new to posting on the forum and glad you have joined us. Have fun and enjoy the Winni Forum while making many new friends.

Thanks for being concern about our lake and shore line.:)

http://i54.tinypic.com/2e56yqf.gif

Where?
 

I'm lost. I see Hen Is, Pitchwood and Oak Islands. Nothing that says Cummings Cove. If this is the small area between Oak and Meredith Neck, the map scale indicates what was said earlier, 150 ft rule should limit speed in that area. If it isn't really GFBL and it's just the neighbors skiing and tubing....
Isn't there a thread about barking dogs, too?

In my area, the Boy Scouts sell popcorn called "Trails End". Ironic, huh?

OK, in fairness, a new member of the forum hit on a sensitive subject. We're here to help each other, and it would appear, in this case, that the help should be to evaluate what the problem and solution might really be. Thanks to the OP for having a sense of humor here.

Yes, I am talking about the small cove between Oak Island and Hen Island. The opening is less than 150' but then the Cove gets bigger. We have lots of rocks in there so there are markers on both sides. I will check with Marine Patrol about this.

I worry about the orrision to our shoreline as well as large wakes damaging everyone's dock.

It is a it confusing because the whole area is called Cummings Cove. We are just a small part

I measured the distance between Oak and Hen on Google maps at about 750' feet.

Maybe pull out some of the rock markers, the word will get around, and they will stay out :laugh:

JK!

I'll answer my own question as I'm almost positive I know the answer.........We purchased this year. Further, my guess is you purchased during the off season and you didn't do your homework. Unfortunately, this is a somewhat of a common occurrence.

The point is Winnipesaukee is somewhat of a zoo on summer weekends. There are a lot folks using the resource and it is busy. If you don't like crowds you should consider some of the smaller, less busy lakes in the area.

Be careful what you wish for.......we used to be able to water ski and tube right off our dock.We are also in a cove so we don't have a lot of wind driven wave action.Wakes from boats kept the shoreline pretty clean.
That is, until,without our knowledge,some of our neighbors were successful in getting our bay zoned a no wake.
Now we are constantly fighting aquatic weeds and silt build up..........most of the people who promoted the change were retirees and kayak/canoe enthusiasts who disapprove of anything that goes faster than 5mph

My family has been here since 1950. My concerns are that this small cove cannot handle high speed boats. We have already lost about two feet of shoreline due to orrision. Just look at my options. It is a great place to be and we all want to keep it that way.

If you either contact the MP or get a petition going, make sure you tell them that your shoreline has erosion and not "orrision".

What's "Oversized"?
 

Include some photographs in your request. This photo is from Winter Harbor, which gets mobbed by wake-surfers, tubers, sky-skiers, waterskiers—but worst are the rubberneckers who view the shoreline at highly-erosive speeds in boats oversized for Lake Winnipesaukee.

Billy Bob for president!

We vacationed for 2 summers in Cummings Cove and really enjoyed it there. The most traffic I saw was on the other side of the cove toward Sally's Gut plus there were boats pulling kids on tubes in the outer half of the cove and they do generate a lot of wave action. But I saw little boat traffic in the area of Oak Island and Hen Island. The inner half of Cummings Cove toward the end and on the left is all rocks and the navigation markers direct boat traffic to the right. The waves from these boats in the"other" areas of Cummings Cove can and do end up in the cove between Oak and Hen. I understand the frustration but it is all part of the busy weekend traffic that occurs on the whole lake. Some of the waves may even come in from outside of Spindle Point at the entrance to Cummings Cove. The cove between Oak and Hen and most of Cummings Cove appear to be protected from the more severe NW winds but I believe the worst shore errosion may occur during windy weather from other than the NW and from normal boat traffic in the whole of Cummings Cove. My experience is that on weekdays it is very quiet in Cummings Cove.

you're right
 

There's nothing out there that erodes like a good wind out of the NW and the lake has managed to deal with it for eons.

That having been said, I'll be submitting a no wake petition for the entire lake for anything over 38 feet, unless it has captain's call and is traveling greater than 45 mph.

A number of years ago we had some newbies who wanted to extend one of the no wake zones in our area. A number of us attended the hearing in Moultonborough and the newbies were outnumbered. The no wake zone was not extended. We live in Green's Basin. Everyone comes in to wakeboard. It can be very busy on the weekends in the summer, but I can put up with it. That is part of summer fun for those on Lake Winnipesaukee. Those looking for lake front homes definitely need to do their homework. We live near Lee's Pond. That is a great place for those who want quiet. I like quiet, but I also like boating all over the lake. Our house was built in 1935 and the 700 feet of shoreline around it is just fine. It has not seen much erosion in the 62 years that I have been there.

Aging effects us all
 

Yes, the eons (more like 12,000 years) of natural erosion has sculpted the shoreline, but the last 100 years of human activity has made its mark. Boat wakes in many places are perpendicular (ie, NE/SW) to the more common natural direction (NW), so is eroding the shoreline in new ways. Weekend boat wake is also stirring up the bottom sediment more strongly and frequently than wind storms. This releases additional nutrients from the shallows into the water column and increases algae growth, which creates more nutrient rich muck on the bottom. A vicious cycle.

There are good reasons for no-wake restrictions on much more of the lake, but recreation value out-weighs the ecological concerns. Water quality in most parts of the lake will probably be acceptable for at least the rest of this century and probably most of the next.

If the state changes the rules for no-wake or no-rafting in one neighborhood, for fairness, it should (IMHO) redefine requirements for the whole lake. Why should one area get more privacy and erosion protection and not others?

If you do submit a petition, make sure that you can answer these questions which will come up at a public meeting:

(1) THE SIZE OF THE BODY OF WATER OR PORTION THEREOF FOR WHICH RULE MAKING ACTION IS BEING CONSIDERED.

(2) THE EFFECT WHICH ADOPTING OR NOT ADOPTING THE RULE (S) WOULD HAVE UPON:
......(A) PUBLIC SAFETY.
......(B) THE MAINTENANCE OF RESIDENTIAL, RECREATIONAL AND SCENIC VALUES.
......(C) THE VARIETY OF USES OF SUCH BODY OF WATER OR PORTION THEREOF.
......(D) THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER QUALITY.
......(E) THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES.

(3) THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE AFFECTED, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, BY ADOPTING OR NOT ADOPTING THE RULE(S).

(4) THE AVAILABILITY AND PRACTICALITY OF ENFORCEMENT OF THE RULE(S).

A) Please confirm that your image was taken at a low lake level.

B) Tell an island resident that they can only have a 14' jon boat with a 7.5 HP motor for getting to their property on a day with 4' to 5'ers running in the Broads.

I bet my "oversized" boat puts out a flatter wake than your underpowered family bowrider.

Thanks for your response. I don't like the big boats (any thing over 25 feet) either but they are here and there isn't much that can be done about it at this point (in my opinion). Has the traffic and erosion gotten noticeably worse in the couple of years at your place? Why the sudden decision to try and enforce a NWZ? Hopefully, you are able to make something happen but I think you are facing long odds.

There are leaves on the trees so presumably the lake level is near full.

no wake
 

Thank you to all who posted to my request. It is very apparent that all of the people that responded to my inquiry are very passionate about the lake. I will take all of the opinions and think about it this winter. it is an amazing part of the world and we should all be grateful that we live there.

See you around lake winni!

ralbaneze

Having spent a lot of time with inlaws at Winter Harbor, I'll agree that it is a beehive of activity on busy summer days, but I don't believe that the boat wakes are any more damaging than wind driven waves since WH faces due west. Many is the day I've seen 3&4 footers rolling right in off the broads with a strong west wind.

After this long discussion, you still haven't told us if your area is 150 feet shore to shore. If it is, it is illegal to make a wake and you do not need a No Wake Zone. A sign will not do any more good than the fact that they are breaking the law already. (assuming it is 150 feet or less). Can you tell us if it is 150'?

Nice
 

too funny!!!

Thanks ralbaneze, let us know if we can be of anymore help. :D

150' or 300'
 

"After this long discussion, you still haven't told us if your area is 150 feet shore to shore. If it is, it is illegal to make a wake and you do not need a No Wake Zone. A sign will not do any more good than the fact that they are breaking the law already. (assuming it is 150 feet or less). Can you tell us if it is 150'?"
If an island is up to 300 feet from the mainland or another island wouldn't the area between both be a no wake zone as you passed between since you couldn't get 150' away from both of them?

First I see shoreline like that all over this country on countless streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds.... In short this isn't shocking..... and shouldn't be supper troubling.........

Second.... APS, as usual your anger seems directed solely at two things "highly-erosive speeds in boats oversized for Lake Winnipesaukee"....

Why don't you ever speak out and stomp your feet about the wake surfers, tubers, sky-skiers, and waterskiiers????

If you are truly so concerned with your shorefront and peace and quiet, I would think you would want these gone too....

wakesurfers, tubers, skiiers, always bring with them loud music, big and repetitive wakes etc......

Am I trying to give you more ammunition, yep maybe, am I trying to stir something up here, yep maybe....

But what am I really trying to do here, is point out, that you always tell us speedboaters, how bad we are, but I never here you complain about all these other activities, which have to have just as much effect on your serenity..... or could it be that you just like to watch these other activities, so they are ok??????

Thank you Lakeboater. I just asked that too and would love to know the answer. I hope he answers us.

Google Earth shows the opening to the cove behind Oak Island to be about 550 feet wide. The cove opens up to about 800 feet inside.

If you take this to a public meeting consider taking along as much real evidence as you can find. As example, your opinion that loons are being disturbed in that cove is nowhere near as good as a letter from the Loon Preservation Society saying the same thing.

I was once arguing alone for a speed limit on a small NH lake. I had lots of opposition and I think I was going down in flames until I took out some 8" by 10" color glossies of offending boats. The speed limit on that lake is still in effect.

A picture says a thousand words.

A better solution?
 

Nearly 50 years ago, my family purchased property in a cove for a few reasons. 1.) Southern exposure/protection from the north wind 2.) Well defined boundary as kids grew up within the confines of the cove 3.) Calm water for skiing. The issue here is number 3. It's entirely possible that people bought property in Cummings Cove because it was great for skiing. By creating a no wake zone in that cove, you remove value.

I'm not an expert in the shoreline protection act, but it would make sense to me that you should be able to take additional measures to protect your land (and its value) without subtracting value from others. Several people in the busy sections of the lake have erected breakwaters to protect their beaches and docks. Your efforts might be better served submitting a request to build such a structure.

I was just looking at the map, and the cove you elude to in your post, is quite wide open... How would you intended to boundary this proposed Now Wake zone....I think that the cove itself could be designated a No-Wake zone.... as it is pretty much a dead end. Draw a line from Hen Island to Oak Island.... Much beyond that and I think you are asking to much....

With that said, how much would the No Wake zone help? My guess is not as much as you would like. The entrance to that cove is pretty wide open, and will allow wave action into the cove regardless. Additionally you will find that boats slowing down in that area will only add to the problem, boats produce a much more sizable wake as they come down off of plane.

My guess here is that you have a neighbor with a performance boat that is irritating you... As he and his buddies come in and out... You may get a no wake zone however you are not going to get rid of your neighbors boats. (this is assumption on my part, if I am wrong I am wrong just tell me)

My other guess would be that people are rafting or anchoring in that area, this may also offended you.... but a now wake zone will not help this either... (once again a guess on my part tell me if I am wrong, I can live with it)...

You mention beach front erosion, that is the down side of having a beach.... The wave action, is always going to cause you issues.... even with a no wake zone waves will make it to your beach... This is an excuse, not a reason for a no wake zone.....In fact what you should be doing, is instead, looking into making your beach into a perched beach, which oh by the way it sounds like you are doing.... I hope you have checked with DES about what you are doing.....I don't think they would complain, as you are doing something that will help the lake, but you never know.

Last I want to touch upon the sound... Maybe your cove becomes a no-wake zone... as I have outlined above.... but you still have the noise emanating from Meredith bay, the area, directly in front of your cove etc..... and of course when those noisy boats are in your cove going no wake the noise is going to be around longer......

Bottom line here is this.... I can believe it or not see your thought about a no-wake zone.... what I can't see is how it is going to help with your problems.... the noise will still be their, and the water will still be quite rough...

So yes you will have a no-wake zone, you maybe able to see a loon family happen.... but you will still have noise, still have erosion issues, and will have made some enemies(potentially).... I just don't think it is worth it myself....

I'll get beat-up over this...BUT...:sleeping:

Why do you fear getting beat up????... you have an opinion I have mine....

I find it interesting that you are all about telling the original poster about how to file for a no wake zone, but you seem to be telling him/her nothing about how it will or will not help with their concerns....

I have on the other hand given them an opinion on the following:
1. a boundary for a reasonable no-wake zone
2. what it will or will not help with

I have always been willing to talk and discuss issues with everyone.... we may not always agree and I am fine with that.... discussions should make people think, and that is all I am trying to do....

You seem to think I have some other agenda.... I really don't.... The area looks like a nice little cove, and maybe having it become a no wake area would be ok..there are area's that set this precedent.. but I also need to know what is driving the need for this... So yes I put some opinions in my post.... and I am fine, if the Original Poster tells me my opinions on why he maybe going to do this are unfounded.... it will help me better understand why he wants a no-wake zone in this area..... Some of the reasons he stated just will not disappear, even with a no-wake zone......

I posted what the OP wanted.

He asked this question: "Can anyone give me advise as to how to start the process of applying for a No Wake zone?"

Then you and few other members go on and on about what he should do and try to make it look like he shouldn't do it.

I was just trying to give the OP what he asked for.

It seems that in your point of view there is absolutely no benefits from a NWZ. Noise will be the same, traffic will be the same, wake will be worse, neighbors will still be obnoxious, and you will have made lots of enemies.

The truth is traffic will be less, people stay away from NWZs. Noise will be less, people stay away from NWZs. Erosion will be less, people stay away from NWZs. And most, but possibly not all, of your neighbors will treat you like a hero.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
 

People have a very parochial view when it comes to speed limits, NWZ, "right of way" versus stand on and give way, etc.

I boat in FL and I have a 30 MPH speed limit, no wake outside of the channel, numerous no wake or minimum wakes etc, inside the channel. We all deal with it just fine.

Winni has very few NWZ and although they can be a pain there are nothing compared to the real world of boating. Speed limits? The exist on snowmobile trails, roads, waterways, and even ski trails can take your ticket for going to fast.

The supporters of no speed limits etc., think that their rights supersede my rights.
For example I find the noise from the GFBL boats to be offensive while some are thrilled with noise. OK...but I have a right to have a limit to the noise and you have the right to make more noise than is necessary.

Noise and speed have not been eliminated but they have been regulated. Everyone did not get what they want but we all got SOME of what we want.

The vast majority of the lake is open to cruising to your hearts content without NWZ. Speed limit of 45 mph is just fine for the vast, vast majority.Things changed on the lake because that is what most wanted! Things will continue to change on the lake to make it safer, and yes less noisy. Or maybe better said Winni is just catching up to the real world.

One thing that never ceases to amaze me anymore about this country is how the wants of the minority out weighs the wants of the majority! And you know I speak the truth!

CAL --

Sooooo true

Me thinks, It's because they make more "noise" about an issue !

(I think its called the squeaky wheel thingy)


.

It is not that a vocal minority rules for the majority.... its that the majority is usually silent and doesn't really give a crap until whatever freedom/privilege/right is taken away. But by then its too late...

I have NO problem with No Wake Zones when it comes to safety.... most (not all) on Lake Winni are there for safety concerns. Others like the NWZ at the end of Meredith Bay kind of bug me. It was placed there for economic reasons (thanks to Rusty McClear & NH Hospitality) to benefit their business. There is no reason safety wise, that NWZ has to be so large.

I have a HUGE problem with No Rafting Zones.... They take away a resource and a freedom enjoyed by the PUBLIC to benefit PRIVATE property owners. In my opinion NRZ's should be abolished!

The Speed limit is what it is... it passed, they won. But just like on the highways, people tend to ignore it somewhat when they can... :)

The noise laws on the books now are sufficient. They were established with input from Boat builders, State & Federal governments. I don't think you will see a change in those anytime soon. If there were to be change... the current boats would be grandfathered anyway.

Woodsy

The cove is not a spot where boats are going to run though all day long... it is a dead end.....

Most of the wave action, comes from the body of water outside the cove.... so if the No Wake zone unreasonably went out as far as going from the point of Meredith neck, to Stonedam island.... then maybe it would help with erosion.. But that is unreasonable... A line from Hen to Oak works and once again I would probably be ok with that, but it still leaves the opening of the cove wide open, and thus will not likely have an effect on the erosion issue. If the opening to the cove was narrow, then the argument of making the area no wake for this reason has more merit.

Noise is what noise is, it travels quite nicely across water.....and with nothing to disturb it, it will carry on for quite a while.... Once again that is a busy part of the lake, the sound is going to carry.... making the small cove a no wake area, is probably not going to bring the daily average db level, down much at all.

So BI you are right, I don't see much benefit to proposing a NWZ in this area... I can go deep into the science for that reasoning, and start providing facts but I have learned in the past that facts don't seem to matter in these cases......

But I have also stated now several times, that I don't see a real problem here, with a reasonable NWZ in that area... I have even defined what the reasonable no wake zone would be.... And stated that I can provide examples of where there are similar areas on the lake....

Last don't quote me wrong, I never said "made lots of enemies"... I said make some enemies.... and even said potentially... which means that hey maybe no enemies would be made... I don't know..... Maybe everyone in the cove would love him for it.....

Bottom line is this.... I have neither fully supported or fully admonished the idea of a no-wake zone in this area.... I have stated my opinions, and why I don't know that it is a good idea.... Quite truthfully it is hard for me to make a determination either way until I see an actual proposal.... If ralbaneze wants to do this, I support him in doing so it is his right..... Notifications will go out to the abbuters of the effected area, and democracy at its finest will go to work.

My only hope is that ralbaneze will notify this forum of his decision, so that if something is submitted we can all review it... and then truly decide how we feel....

I didn't bring the debate into this thread, I only joined in once it got going... I have tried my best to offer constructive comments.... Never once I have spoke negatively to the idea... I have simply stated my opinion as to why, I don't think the NWZ will bring about the results the original poster seems to want... Apparently that is being translated into, the concept that I am a no good speed demon.....

Here is the funny part, I own a 18' bow rider, that currently tops out at maybe 50... All the rules that everyone gets all up and argumentative about have effected my enjoyment of the lake 0%...... my boating practices have not changed, and I enjoy the lake, just as I want everyone else to have the opportunity to.... I however want people to think about what they propose, and what good may or may not come of it... I don't use scare tactics, I provide facts when I can, and am and have always been willing to sit down and talk about the lake and issues concerning the lake with people when ever possible... Constructively....

Ok...I'll bite
 

What is a highly erosive speed? The first complaint was about GO FAST BE LOUD boats in this little cove. So which is it? The GO FAST or the rubbernecking GO SLOW boats the should be banned from this little cove? If I run my GO SLOW boat really fast does that count. If I had a go fast boat and ran it slow with the captain's call in quiet mode is that ok? The lake is a beautiful place and it should be for EVERONE to enjoy.
The Breeze
Wave 'cuz I'll be wavin' back

Woodsy - I tend to Agree with ALL of your points made .... well stated.

As for the NWZ in Meredith Bay (which I totally agree covers an expansive & needless amount of the Bay) --- I was always of the belief that it was enacted as a result of the infamous & tragic boating incident many years back -- Cigarette boat vs. 22' Sea Ray one summer evening.

:confused:

But now that you introduce the McClear element is makes all kinds of sense that they pushed for it to hold the waves & such down at the Church Landing slips and Gazebo area

.

That might be fun! Until the 1st tough issue and my getting upset when someone points out my hidden positions and stances.

If the forum is any example then the vocal minority, the ones yelling and screaming that their right to be loud etc, outweighs their rights. As if the GFBL crowd has a God given birthright to "live free or die". Thank God you are in the minority but your minority voices are surely the loudest!

want to take a moment and proof read that Not to Worry ?


.

I think you need to spend some time re-reading this forum, particularly the threads relative to noise.

Every boat on this lake meets the noise limits established through RSA. Boats that do not are subject to enforcement. You may not like the decibel level established, but your fight is in Concord, not here.

And there is no GFBL "crowd"

No worries:)

Well said "Thanks!" I lost my "thanks" ability somehow so thought i would do it this way.

I think you get 5 a day.

I concur with Jason as well, particularly the last paragraph

Thanks, I assumed it was my browser.

Go 45mph and do so without the roar...what is the big deal?
 

First: it is soooooo easy to get the GFBL crowd a on their soapbox and declare their rights are superior to those who prefer less noise and less speed. I agree that the speed issue is MOOT! So no need to go there....then again I think this post started with someone complaining about speed and noise in their cove AND the only way to deal with the would be a NWZ. I too hate the NWZ...but that is life as a boater...so I deal and try and understand without getting my panties all in a twist.

Second: No, not all boats meet the noise limits but that was not my point. BTW read the last thread on all this stuff and you will find people stating how much they enjoy the noise....and that is fine....I do not and that is fine but do not bitch when MP enforces the law! I do not want to deprive people of the right to enjoy the lake as long as your "right" does not crush my right.

You just created your own soapbox as a non-GFBL supporter...:coolsm:

Just to be clear here I am Jason....and as VitaBene knows, I really love this lake, and truly want everyone to enjoy it.... But I also look at things not just with my heart, but through effective communication, facts, and examining all side of an argument.......

I mean what I say..... I am willing to talk and discuss issues with anyone..... Understand we may not agree, but at the end of the conversation, we or at least I will respect the others arguments.... I Just like to know that people see all aspects of an issue.....

At the end of the day we all draw our own conclusions, and we all need to respect that

My goodness young man, enough already!

The OP said he will think about it this winter.

We all know how you feel about the topic...give it a rest!

You should hear my boat with its thru prop hub exhaust. So loud:rolleye1:

Classy... "panties in a bunch" and "bitching" in one post!

And I think we all know how you feel about the topic as well.

I have no feelings at all about NWZ's. I have not stated any on this thread so I don't know how you can say that.

I have tried to stay on topic and give the OP some help with how to get started with a NWZ petition.

I think the OP will give the NWZ a lot of thought and I am going to stay out of lecturing him about whether he should or shouldn't do it.

All I know is that we have to many NWZ going out of Green's Basin!

WinnFabs
 

I'm actually waiting for them to ban boats off the lake as the lake is a reservoir like Massabesic or Quabin. They brought this subject up many times, but they did not follow through. :cool:

I was all done, when I finished my original post......

Then you and Bear Islander, tried to insinuate that I was full of hot air and had a different agenda. To me you where trying to discredit, what I had to say. So I felt the need and still do to point out the FACTS:

1. I was not telling the OP that a NWZ was unwarranted... In fact I could potentially support it

2. I was stating why I believed that the OP might not really get the desired effect that he was hopping for, with a NWZ based on the Geography of the area.

Its funny that the OP, thanked me for my original comment and stance, but yet you and Bear Islander, have done nothing but try put a negative connotation to my comments.

Why is it you feel the need to continue to comment, and be negative and condescending to others?????

Thumbs-up for Pontoon Boats...
 

Reading here, that Cobalt has introduced pontoon boats to its lineup is really good news, as pontoon boats leave scarcely any wake.

This clump of Winter Harbor trees (Maple? Northern Ash?) appears about 75 years old (each).

Seventy-five years ago, those trees could not have stayed rooted under the assault of the oversized boats that presently erode our shores. :eek:

OK—so you're not shocked.


:rolleye1:

APS, I have two clumps of Oak on the shoreline in front of my place that have had no problems what so ever taking root and growing. This has happened in the last 10 years... And I am in an area that is just as busy if not busier then Winter Harbor.

Is you contention that the erosion shown in both your pictures in this thread are from erosion cause solely by boat wakes?

And once again I am not shocked by either picture... Nor will I say that boat wakes haven't contributed in some part in the erosion. But I will not allow someone to say that boat wakes are the sole factor. In both these cases, I see other contributing factors. Most evident is in the second picture, is how the natural drainage of the land flows right under the root ball.... telling me that mother nature played a factor in this situation.

There is no doubt that boat wakes have cause some issues. But so has development, and mother nature. When I see someone or group, working just as hard, to curb development along the water front, and also preaching that mother nature, is simply going to cause some erosion, they will have my support.

But I will not support a view, that boat wakes are the cause of all erosion problems.

I do agree the erosion under the tree is quite sustantial. But, I cannot blame this on a single cause as the tree is growing right at the waterline with every type of wave action hitting its roots and from what I see it appears to be at the bottom of a incline and in the path of water runoff. The roots look to have been exposed for quite some time too. So it gets it from both sides and is lucky it lasted this long, tough tree though. I have seen this situation with tree roots exposed before on the lake so it is not a new, single or fast occurance with a single cause. This took a long time to happen.

Come on Ken, can't you tell that those roots were exposed only by wakes from "oversized ocean racers":rolleye1:

I swore I'd never chime in on this after my original post figuring (like many others) that we'd end up here in the "issues" forum, however here I am...

Full disclosure, I'm opposed to adding any further no wake zones to the lake, we've got plenty now thanks (IMHO). This was only strengthened a few years ago when some "neighbors" tried to slide a new NWZ in at the Barber's Pole under less than honorable conditions (again, my opinion). I stayed out of the debate on the forum on that one. When the true abutters of the potential NWZ were notified and were able to express their opinions the State determined things were fine as they were.

It was said then and I'll repeat it now: Instead of trying to enact more restrictions, perhaps the OP could contact the Marine Patrol to enforce the existing laws. (150 foot rule for example) They camp out at Eagle Island most weekends so it's not like they're not in the general area. Maybe it's a newer family that's not familiar with our local rules. A simple conversation could greatly reduce this issue and maybe eliminate it all together.

All this said, I can also see where the OP is coming from. There are times when it would be nice if those on the lake (usually a small minority of users) had some understanding that their activities on the lake can get annoying others around them. To have the same boat / boats/ jet ski's / etc. continually passing by for a long period of time can wear on you. We deal with it at our location periodically but then again when we bought our place we knew that we'd have boat traffic on weekends.

We've got plenty of time to hash this out before the next boating season. Personally I hope we all get to see more threads like Cate's epic sailboat trip from last season as we move forward. That's the good stuff on here, we should all try to do more of that, maybe it'll be contagious! :D

The truth is...boaters avoid NWZ
 

Aren't you just trading one problem for another? If you put in a NWZ, I'd expect the cove would be a much better place to drop the hook for the day, invite a few of my friends to join me...

"Boaters avoid NWZ....."
 

Did ya notice when Gov. Island side of Eagle became a no wake zone, the narrow channel between Spindle point and Eagle's became a combat zone?

I actually avoid that area when I was nearly clipped by a rental pontoon boat a few years ago. Far safer to putt putt through the no wake zone.

If your this concerned about the wave action killing a few trees ( by the way there are seeds for these and you can actually plant new ones ) You must be going over the edge about the dam in Laconia that actually makes the lake larger then the "creator " ( whoever she might be ) originally intended the lake to be .
Can you imagine the number of trees that dam dam has killed ?
Do we need a " stop the dam " group ? Or " lower the lake , save a tree "
Perhaps that needs to be in a different thread ?

There ya go!
 

Get rid of the dam and make the lake smaller! That should make you happy.

The way the govt is spending billions of our hard earn money going green, I won't be surprise they would raise the dam for more hydroelectric power!

Then you would have to fight the govt. instead of boaters.