View Single Post
Old 09-24-2020, 09:22 AM   #102
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,211
Thanks: 1,114
Thanked 936 Times in 578 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
As a complete outsider and non-resident "the Winnipesaukee pollution Problem" as one poster put it seems like it is not one problem, but several complaints/concerns.
  1. Is the lake clean enough to swim in, given all the concerns about people using it for their personal bathroom and other medical issues raised?
  2. Can you use the lake water to drink from without significant levels of treatment?
  3. Can the lake water be even better with restrictions, fines, increased boat registration fees?
  4. Can the lake water be even better with home owner restrictions, changes in practices, and less waterfront homes?

Well for issue #1 I hope so, given how many swim in the lake every year, but in truth the bulk of that activity occurs for maybe 10 - 12 weeks at best, and the peek maybe as little as 4 - 6 weeks. So, it really begs the question of people on/in the water having a long-lasting impact. MAYBE for a short time, but it seems unlikely a lasting impact comes from people on/in the water.

Issue #2 probably looks very different to an outsider, there is no way I am configuring my drinking water to come from any body of water near a population without significant filtration, and even then I might still opt for a well. Is it really so costly to drill a well right next to a lake? Given that the houses we are talking about are often now valued over a million dollars and maybe much more, is the cost of a well and a treatment system even significant?

For issue #3, the cynic in me says no amount of increased cost or fines or fees or fuel tax will change whats going on. In the 21st century people seem to have unlimited spending power for what they want, even if its on borrowed money. I think the gas guzzler tax vs the electric car government incentives is a perfect example of a total failure and sham perpetrated on the tax payers. Americans want big powerful boats, trucks, and SUV's, and no financial program is changing that, not even when gas hit $4.00+/gal. Any change in usage will need to come from a different base than increased cost.

And sadly issue #4 is similar, you folks who live there and voice concern are also the ones who have the power to change this now. Give up lawns, stop clearing and maintaining your lots, move away and turn your property into conservation land. Ya, not even close to realistic. Pretty much the same as issue #3. People want what they want, and somehow feel their presence on the planet is not a contributing factor to these concerns, its always the other guy who is doing something more harmful that is the real problem.

I have NO answers is any of this and in truth believe the planet is here for us to use. Not abuse, but use. And based on what I see (not hear) most of you believe the same thing, or you would live in cities and just look at webcam images of Winnipesaukee so as to not impact it in any way.

Well this should be more than enough to get me pulverized in responses,,,
We know the answers to all of these questions. The lake is obviously great for swimming and not advised for drinking.

You're way too cynical on the inability of government and people to help the lake. Gas guzzler taxes and MPG requirements did improve average fuel economy. Government incentives for EVs (and solar) have been essential to getting both of those industries off the ground, and we are now weaning ourselves off of them as the economics of the new technology are becoming equal to the old entrenched stuff. (plenty of documentation for all these assertions if you google) And as ishoot has pointed out--uses (abuses) of the lake by individuals were much worse decades ago. We can do this!
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote