View Single Post
Old 05-21-2008, 12:46 PM   #308
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle Boy View Post
VtSteve makes some good points, however his statement about having little respect for whiners, selfish ones at that , deserves further comment. Evenstar, in my opinion, has been reepeatedly and angrily denounced for opinions which differ from most of the posters on this forum. Her concerns echo those of many of us who feel that boating on Winni has taken on a "wild west, anything goes" atmosphere. The rancor leveled at her and others who have supported a speed limit for Winni has driven away or kept away those who may have dissenting opinions, again in my opinion. Many, many people have earnestly embraced the 45/25 speed limit as a reasonable solution, and there has been no shortage of "whiners" and melodrama in the anti speed limit camp. A few arguments/issues I've had difficulty with:

1) We should not have a speed limit because there are not enough resources to enforce them. Well in my NH town we have many many miles of road and just 1 or 2 cops to enforce speed limits. I can drive for miles and miles with little expectation of seeing a police cruiser. Does that mean we should repeal all speed limits in town? Obviously not...the speed limit alone is a deterrent for most people.

2) The arguments that a speed limit will unequivably drive business from the state . Many business owners have been proponents of the speed limit because they feel it will improve business and that said wild west atmosphere has in fact driven many power boaters away.

3) That the pro speed limit group has a monopoly on all of the melodrama in this controversy over speed limits on the lake. After the house passed the first speed limit, one objector moaned " if the old man of the mtn were still standing, he would have shed a tear today". Oh brother.

4) A poll showing that the majority of NH people are in favor of speed limits has been dismissed with a variety of specious (and angry, bitter) arguments . Our legislators in the House and Senate are characterized as having been totally bamboozled by the Winnfabs (sometimes referred to as Winncrabs, Winnfarts) crowd. One poster commented that we need to vote these hacks out. Isn't that what happened after the last election with a Senate that rejected speed limits?

5) That this law is really only a thinly disguised way of getting boats/boaters off the lake that they don't like. In reality, reasonable people and their representatives make laws all the time to restrict objectionable behavior that is felt to be inappropriate. For example, we have laws in my town that regulate dogs who bark all night. Have we enacted legislation against dogs/owners that we don't like? Call it whatever you want. And if people object to boats going 70 MPH 150' from the little put put from which they are fishing...well.

Well, enough for now, but to Evenstar, just because you've been singled out and maligned in a forum where you are the minority doesn't mean that no one hasn't noted your sincere committment to what you believe in. Keep up the good work. The speed limit will happen. Maybe people will even slow down enough to ... see the turtles.
Repeatedly, the obvious things argued were ignored. Having a speed limit will not, repeat, will not, prevent the 150' rule from being violated. There were some that finally broke down and claimed that their support for 45/25 was primarily based on getting rid of as many GFBL boats as they could. Evenstar was repeatedly making the claim that she was in constant fear of "high-speed boats" invading her 150' area, and never once (to the best of my feeble memory), complained about the lack of enforcement. She also went through some rather dubious statistical feats to try and discredit the MP speed study.

I've always contended that the major areas being cited as reason enough for the speed limit were flawed. BI's many posts regarding the NWZ being violated, sometimes at very high speeds, spoke to the complete lack of enforcement there. The 150' rule is one of the most fundamental safety laws on the lake. But according to many, it is violated constantly. I'm admitting that I'm assuming here, that in order to avoid discussions about increased MP presence and funding for enforcement, she in particular went out of her way to come up with some rather creative reasoning. I don't automatically assume that by having a speed limit it will cut down on the number of 150' violations. I base this assumption only on the fact that the vast majority of violations I've witnessed over the years through now, and other's stated posts, are done by boaters not exceeding the proposed speed limit.

The last desperation of some concluded that the tragic accident that occurred in the bay, was reason enough for the speed limit. The boat was "calculated" to be doing 28mph at night, not 25mph or less. The more crap that was thrown out regarding erosion, waves, etc... I quickly realized there were other reasons for the limit being proposed. Some admitted to it, others to this day do not.

I think the reason she was "singled out", as you put it, is not because of her position. Heck, everyone has opinions. It was the fact that she engages in behavior on the lake that many of us old timers viewed as imprudent forty years ago, let alone today. That was an opinion, so fine and fair. But to use outrageous extrapolations of data and call it statistical evidence that proves a study is flawed, totally dismiss the flag on kayak issue that I know many kayakers actually think is a good idea, and to repeatedly state opinions as fact is subject to a heated debate.

The fact that no proponents of the new law, (again, that I'm aware of), ever engaged in a discussion of the lack of enforcement or additional funding, spoke volumes as to where their stands really were on the issue. They apparently weren't scared that the new speed limit would be enforced, only that it was passed.

So no, I have no respect for whiners that will not, repeat, will not address concerns about enforcement, and will not even begin to discuss their own behavior. Many of us have been boating for decades, and know full well what the problems on the water are. The first time I had the discussion of reckless behavior on Winni was some 25 years ago, which is a couple of decades plus longer than she ever dropped her sea kayak in the lake. Her complaints almost coincided with her boat getting wet there. But instead of realizing that the laws she cites repeatedly be enforced, she spent a great deal of time supporting this new law, never really entering into a discussion as to how it would be enforced.

Statistical studies aside, I call that BS every time I see it. Those that are never wrong, rarely engage in discussion that could lead to obvious solutions. As one of the MP dudes said, you'd think Winni was total carnage during the summer. In reality, there are some boaters that need to be spanked for their actions, or just taken off the lake. So don't get all teary eyed about angry rebuttals, the total refusal to debate facts or solutions that would be obvious to most is the real issue.

The next step is already on the table. Next summer, exactly what will be done to solve the problems?
VtSteve is offline