Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues > Speed Limits
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Today's Posts

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-17-2007, 07:22 AM   #1
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,615
Thanks: 256
Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts
Exclamation Speed Limit test zones dead in the water!

There will be no test speed zones on Winni this year and we are now back to the statewide speed limit proposal.

Read all about it HERE in today's on-line edition of the Citizen!
Skip is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 07:43 AM   #2
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,573
Thanks: 753
Thanked 354 Times in 266 Posts
Default Website to Oppose

Here is the link to submit your opposition to this ridiculous bill

http://www.opposehb847.com/

All should get involved!
AC2717 is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 08:03 AM   #3
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,938
Thanks: 2,205
Thanked 776 Times in 553 Posts
Thumbs down Moving the Hazard

As a practical matter, all that the southernmost speed zone did was to move the hazard from one side of Rattlesnake Island to the other. The Broads side of the island devolved into "the passing lane".

Just visiting my MD-friend's place on Rattlesnake became even more a hit-and-miss proposal: just to wave "Hi" meant running the gauntlet twice.

As most in law enforcement will tell you, "You don't fix crime with enforcement, you just move it".
__________________
Is it
"Common Sense" isn't.
ApS is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 08:34 AM   #4
Islander
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Barrett loses another round in his attempt to scuttle speed limits with an 8 year "Pilot Program".

I hope this doesn't effect any of those big money jobs in the boating industry he has been preparing for.
Islander is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 09:29 AM   #5
B R
Senior Member
 
B R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

what are you even talking about?

Were they (winfabs) afraid the facts would get in the way of their agenda? certainly seems so after reading the article.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
B R is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 08-17-2007, 10:30 AM   #6
jeffk
Senior Member
 
jeffk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,167
Thanks: 205
Thanked 433 Times in 250 Posts
Default Facts don’t matter …

… because this is not a rational discussion. Interestingly enough I do not believe that it is based on fear either, although “terrified” and “anguished” people make for good theater during hearings. The push for speed limits is fueled by anger and the desire for revenge over the death of one of their friends. There is no reasoning or discussion with such single minded anger. A large speedboat was responsible for the death of their friend so these boats must be removed from the lake. Since it would probably be impossible to ban a specific boat type the next best thing would be to pass a speed limit that would limit the enjoyable use of such boats and make them “persona non grata” on the lake.

The only thing that facts could do in this case might be to slow up the progress toward a speed limit. It is no surprise that the pro speed limit organizations don’t want to be bothered with inconvenient facts that would impede their agenda.
jeffk is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 11:18 AM   #7
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

I'm not sure responding to the "we need speed" crowd is worth the trouble anymore. Just read the latest on the fatal Maine boat disaster. How many politicians are going to read that and vote against speed limits.

This bill is a done deal. Even the leaders of the opposition know that now. And Barrett acknowledged it in the article.

"I still believe a statute is going to pass," said Barrett.
Island Lover is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 11:54 AM   #8
Paugus Bay Resident
Senior Member
 
Paugus Bay Resident's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Gilmanton, NH
Posts: 754
Thanks: 136
Thanked 93 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Quote:
the "we need speed" crowd
Its not we need speed crowd. Heck, my boat won't even hit 40. It's the personal responsibility, personal freedom, smaller government, etc. crowd. We're becoming a society where the government is taking more and more responsibility for our choices. Remember 1984? Once we go down that slope there's no coming back. I think you've been missing that message all along. Anyway, I'm done with this.
Paugus Bay Resident is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 12:05 PM   #9
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident
Its not we need speed crowd. Heck, my boat won't even hit 40. It's the personal responsibility, personal freedom, smaller government, etc. crowd. We're becoming a society where the government is taking more and more responsibility for our choices. Remember 1984? Once we go down that slope there's no coming back. I think you've been missing that message all along. Anyway, I'm done with this.
Did you even read 1984?

You equate a speed limit to 1984? Get a clue!
Island Lover is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 12:21 PM   #10
Paugus Bay Resident
Senior Member
 
Paugus Bay Resident's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Gilmanton, NH
Posts: 754
Thanks: 136
Thanked 93 Times in 51 Posts
Default

I said I was done, but personal insults tend to require a response. YES I read it. 1984 posits a world where the government is totalitarian in word and deed. According to the government, this life must be endured for the collective good. If you can't see the parallel with losing personal freedom and personal responsibility, then I give up. Like I said I'm done. I hope you archive your utopia it's clearly different than mine.
Paugus Bay Resident is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 12:21 PM   #11
jrc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
Default

So you don't think 1984 applies, how about if I paraphase 1934?

First they came for the fast boaters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a fast boater.
Then they came for the rafters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a rafter.
Then they came for the yachters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a yachter.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.
jrc is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 12:39 PM   #12
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Here's the article on WMUR's website.A lot of reteric from the pro speed limit groups but no opposing viewpoints.It's certainly not because everyones in favor.Hmmm.
http://www.wmur.com/news/13915326/detail.html
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 02:11 PM   #13
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SIKSUKR
Here's the article on WMUR's website.A lot of reteric from the pro speed limit groups but no opposing viewpoints.It's certainly not because everyones in favor.Hmmm.
http://www.wmur.com/news/13915326/detail.html
The lack of response is not because there is no opposition.

It's because the opposition knows its all over.




Explain please why speed limits on lakes will bring about 1984, but speed limits on roads are ok? Or are you against them as well?
Island Lover is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 02:14 PM   #14
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

That's not how I see it.Most fair media will show both sides of a hotly debated story.
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 03:25 PM   #15
kjbathe
Senior Member
 
kjbathe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 281
Thanks: 3
Thanked 21 Times in 11 Posts
Default What's the issue?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that if part of the objection to the pilot was the 8-year duration, change it to a one-year pilot, get the information and make an informed decision. Common sense?

My honest opinion is that speed limit or no, it's not going to change anything of significance on the water: I think most boats out there are doing less than 45 MPH, 45+ MPH on a weekend is typically hard to do comfortably with the boat density and associated chop, and then if you even have some boats doing 45+, what's the likelihood of an enforcement officer being in the right place all the time to stop it? My read of MP's data collection to date seems to support the idea that few boats are in excess of 45. And if the even smaller population of night-time boaters is comfortable going over 25, have at it!

What are we really debating here? I just don't see this making any difference if it passes or not. I'm now on the sidelines with Paugus Bay Resident on this one
kjbathe is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 03:39 PM   #16
Islander
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbathe
What are we really debating here? I just don't see this making any difference if it passes or not.
We are debating the future of the lake. It will make a huge difference!

Its not really about how fast a given boat goes. It IS about the direction the lake community is taking. I don't care if they hand out a lot of tickets or not.

When the speed limit passes the lake will take a step back from the more speed, more horsepower, more noise direction we are in now.

Most of the high speed boats will go somewhere else. I'll say that again so it can sink in. THEY WILL GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!!

The lake will never go back to "Golden Pond". But it is a big step in that direction.
Islander is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 04:48 PM   #17
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Ever since the speed limit debate began we have been told by the opposition that if it passes the lakes area will be economically devastated.

They claim that millions in high speed boat sales, service, hotel and restaurant revenues will be lost. Many people testified to this at the hearings two years ago.

Now we are supposed to believe that nothing will be changed by a speed limit! The old argument was not working so they will try a new one.

Boats that have moved another body of water can not be breaking the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee. That makes a speed limit self enforcing. They will not be speeding, because they will not be here!

And the lake will be a little quieter, less hectic and less polluted.
Island Lover is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 05:11 PM   #18
Irrigation Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 484
Thanks: 89
Thanked 138 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Island Lover

And the lake will be a little quieter, less hectic and less polluted.
Its not the speed of a boat that is scary, its all the boats violating the 150 foot rule.

Noise is an issue on some boats and going 45 mph or less isn't gonna change that. Sorry.

Pollution is a result of the shear number of boats not the few that are going over 45 mph.

One member in particular from Bear island has stated in the past that their boat often exceeds 45 mph(even 60). I wonder if they are aware its causing alot of pollution while doing that scary excessive speed?

I just wish the MP would spend more time enforcing the 150' rule.

Who cares how fast a boat is going in the wide open spaces anyway? Geesh.
Irrigation Guy is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 07:17 PM   #19
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,709
Thanks: 751
Thanked 1,455 Times in 1,012 Posts
Default

You are so right, Paugus, don't quit, we need people like you to speak for our rights. I get very frustrated getting in these kinds of discussions too. And JRC, I agree, very well said. And Local Realtor, I totally agree, it is the 150 rule which is NOT enforced. Evenstar is too young to realize that laws are made for those who don't need them. The others won't follow them anyway. My bitch is why do so many people get involved in this who don't live on or even near the lake. Why does someone who lives in say, Manchester and never comes here, care? Many of these surveys include these people who have no clue.
tis is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 04:49 PM   #20
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,944
Thanks: 544
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander
We are debating the future of the lake. It will make a huge difference!

Its not really about how fast a given boat goes. It IS about the direction the lake community is taking. I don't care if they hand out a lot of tickets or not.

When the speed limit passes the lake will take a step back from the more speed, more horsepower, more noise direction we are in now.

Most of the high speed boats will go somewhere else. I'll say that again so it can sink in. THEY WILL GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!!

The lake will never go back to "Golden Pond". But it is a big step in that direction.
Seeing as how speed limits on roads don't prevent people from driving at whatever speed they deem reasonable, what makes you think it will be any better on a lake? Where the officer to driver ratio is lower, and then travel lanes are less predictable, and it's harder to setup a speed trap?

A speed limit on the lake will only become a revenue stream to whomever ends up enforcing it.

As for the speedboats going someplace else, I also doubt that. There are really no other nearby inland lakes large enough to make their use fun, and a lot of their owners seem to have a vested interest in Winnipesaukee (slips, condos, homes, etc).

True enforcement may also become a bit of an issue, as speedometers are not a given on boats like they are on cars, so there will be a lot of "warnings" written. The sending units for many speedo's on boats are easily fouled, resulting in inaccurate readings.

Enforcement of existing rules (150', etc) would probably provide more of a reduction in annoyance than yet another law. If current laws aren't enforced well, what is so special about a speed limit law that makes people think it will have any realistic impact?
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 05:09 PM   #21
WeirsBeachBoater
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 709
Blog Entries: 9
Thanks: 39
Thanked 148 Times in 65 Posts
Exclamation Islander you are insane!

Edit: I meant Island Lover in the title, But rereading it is appropriate for both parties!

The opposition is very much alive. Growing everyday, and its because of people like you and your ranting and raving. For that I thank you. Here's the deal folks for those of you that don't know.

Round 1 Winnfabs lost HB 162 in the Senate.

Round 2 Winnfabs invokes their right to petition the Commissioner.

Round 3 Starts because Winnfabs finds out Commissioner is not going to step on Legislatures toes, thus HB 847 is born. Round 3.1 is that the committee on HB 847 decides to table the bill until there is more data, that is supposed to come from the petition that WINNFABS brought to the commissioner.

Today round 3.2 WINNFABS finds out what their petition would have really meant, meaning the fact WE DO NOT NEED a speed limit, so what do they do. WINNFABS makes sure to scuttle THEIR OWN PETITION. Now for those faithful forum readers, it is obvious that they are not only out for the GFBLs as they call them, the recent thread on rafting shows that the same people want to get rid of the Big Obtrusive Cabin Cruisers....

In the end, they want, loons calling as they pass by in birch bark canoes.....

It is time that they are called out for what they are. Extremists, Winnfabs will win if the public believes their nonsense. I am here to tell you all, Stand up, be counted make the time to beat these people back! Come to the hearings, take the day off work if you have to. I have, many others have, if you don't we will all lose our ability to enjoy our lakes. Unless you have that birch bark canoe they all want to see.....

Last edited by WeirsBeachBoater; 08-17-2007 at 07:34 PM.
WeirsBeachBoater is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 07:36 PM   #22
Lakegeezer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,677
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 354
Thanked 639 Times in 290 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater
Islander you are insane!
Hey! Lighten up. Islander is entitled to express an opinion here and we are all entitled to our opinion of that opinion. Leave the psycobable out of it. The insults too.
__________________
-lg
Lakegeezer is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 08:34 PM   #23
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Yes the argument has changed from it will destroy the economy to it will not change a thing. If it will not change anything, then there is no reason not to give it a try.

If it doesn't work I will be in favor of a repeal.

Speed limits failed in the Senate by two votes. Those Senators have been replaced.

The petition was for a lakewide speed limit. Barrett decided that meant an 8 year test study in two small areas. Just a delay tactic.
Island Lover is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 01:45 PM   #24
B R
Senior Member
 
B R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrc
So you don't think 1984 applies, how about if I paraphase 1934?

First they came for the fast boaters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a fast boater.
Then they came for the rafters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a rafter.
Then they came for the yachters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a yachter.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.
very well said.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
B R is offline  
Old 08-17-2007, 12:08 PM   #25
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident
Its not we need speed crowd. Heck, my boat won't even hit 40. It's the personal responsibility, personal freedom, smaller government, etc. crowd. We're becoming a society where the government is taking more and more responsibility for our choices. Remember 1984? Once we go down that slope there's no coming back. I think you've been missing that message all along. Anyway, I'm done with this.
Unfortunately, the reason that we need laws (like a lake speed limit law), is that too many members of our society put their own freedoms above the freedom of others. There are just way too many self-centered people who feel that they have the "right" to do whatever they enjoy doing - reguardless on how it affects others.

I'm not saying that everyone (with a fast boat) feels that way, but I do believe that there are enough of them to justify a NH lake speed limit law - to protect the rights of others (especially those in smaller, slower boats) to safely use the same lakes. Otherwise those with the most horsepower win - they get to keep their freedom, while the rest of us lose some of our freedom.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline  
Old 08-29-2007, 05:51 PM   #26
Gilligan
Senior Member
 
Gilligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Bay State
Posts: 119
Thanks: 8
Thanked 11 Times in 4 Posts
Thumbs down How you say it

Quote:
Originally Posted by Island Lover
I'm not sure responding to the "we need speed" crowd is worth the trouble anymore.

"I still believe a statute is going to pass," said Barrett.
I try to stay out of this thread but I am against more speed limits on the lake.

I am not a member of a "we need speed" crowd. To make such a statement shows your obvious bias. Are you trying to persuade people that anti-speed limit means we want lots of speed? There are more choices and opinions.
__________________
Gilligan is offline  
Old 08-23-2007, 09:26 AM   #27
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,573
Thanks: 753
Thanked 354 Times in 266 Posts
Default

Just received this in an email because I am on the mailing list for alerts. I know we already know here that it has been defeated, but here is the more definitive direction of those that want a speed law in place are now going, it is a warning to us all:
Quote:
The speed limit pilot offered by the NH Marine Patrol has been cancelled by the administration rule department. The pro-speed group lobbied to have it cancelled, citing it wasn't going to prove anything. The pro-speed group are now targeting PWCs, large cruisers in addition to performance boats and anything they deemed unsafe for our lakes. You can rest assured they will be contacting the representatives to twist their message that speed limits are needed. Only you can make a difference.

The chairman Rep Ryan, was quoted as saying its time for the House to get this bill and from what we gather he supports the bill. The pro-speed limit group often cites a poll that was done by random NH citizens, not random boaters. Your support is needed to help protect your rights!!

The Transportation committee is likely to vote on a recommendation this fall and then it goes to the full house in Jan 2008. If passed it will go the Senate, which they will have another hearing. We will need you at this hearing!!!

1. Stay informed, be active and come to the hearings.
2. Contact Transportation Committee if you haven't already.
3. Contact your local Representatives and Senators
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ns/w...eg/default.asp This will go to the whole house end of the month. Calls and letters work best, then emails.
4. If you haven't already, sign a new petition at http://www.opposehb847.com to be updated on status
5. Contact the local businesses your frequent that oppose the bill and ask them to get involved. Forward their names to info@nhrba.com to become part of Businesses that oppose HB847
6. Pass this onto EVERYONE you know.
7. We could use your letters to add to other ones provided by boaters like to you to put into a comprehensive package to be given to our legislators. Please send them to my email info@nhrba.com.
8. If you want financially help in this battle, you can purchase HB847 decals and posters, send an email to erica@nhrba.com if you wish to get any.

Your freedoms are being taking away without justification! Please contact the Transportation Committee members and your local representatives.

Thank you,
Custie
http://www.opposehb847.com
Again, pass this on to everyone you know who can help us protect our rights.
AC2717 is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.45170 seconds