|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Calendar | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
12-04-2018, 04:06 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,526
Thanks: 3,135
Thanked 1,090 Times in 784 Posts
|
Adjusting the No Wake Zone law
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day. |
12-04-2018, 04:32 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
Broad hopper, because I know a lot of people won't bother to open the link, I thought I would copy the article. Thanks for posting the link.
Quote:
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to tis For This Useful Post: | ||
steve c (12-05-2018) |
12-04-2018, 04:55 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Meredith Bay & LI, NY
Posts: 3,220
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,007 Times in 648 Posts
|
I think the clarification will help. Although experienced boaters understand the law others read into it too much and just use 6 mph which can cause a wake especially on larger boats
Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
The Following User Says Thank You to joey2665 For This Useful Post: | ||
FlyingScot (12-04-2018) |
12-04-2018, 05:08 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
|
12-04-2018, 05:23 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,940
Thanks: 536
Thanked 568 Times in 334 Posts
|
Pretty soon you're going to need to pack an overnight bag if you plan to travel more than a couple of miles on the lake.
__________________
[insert witty phrase here] |
Sponsored Links |
|
12-04-2018, 06:36 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
I agree with you and what you said, Joey. The clarification is needed. Proof of that is BigGuy's comment: " no, not this again!" We have gone over and over it and there is no agreement. There are those that still think the law means you can always go 6 MPH in a NWZ.
|
12-05-2018, 08:58 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,528
Thanks: 748
Thanked 345 Times in 258 Posts
|
Are marine patrol going to have to spend time in NWZ with a radar gun?? Seriously this rep out of Laconia according to the story, should focus on improving his town and the economic down turn they are experiencing when a majority are experiencing growth, instead of what a resident from Gilford sees from his/her Gov. Island Ivory tower. Sad thing is this clown represents me and I cannot even vote against him because I cannot vote in Laconia. We have a department for this it's called DES. This is a "do nothing" bill proposal that is wasting time
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries" Last edited by AC2717; 12-05-2018 at 09:58 AM. |
The Following User Says Thank You to AC2717 For This Useful Post: | ||
Reilly (12-06-2018) |
12-05-2018, 09:43 AM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 2,925
Thanks: 657
Thanked 2,168 Times in 910 Posts
|
Quote:
Also, not all of the houses on Governors Island are waterfront high value homes. There are numerous inland homes that have a much lower value. But, most importantly, the article did not say he lives on Governors Island and he does not. He lives in Laconia. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to TiltonBB For This Useful Post: | ||
AC2717 (12-05-2018) |
12-05-2018, 09:56 AM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,528
Thanks: 748
Thanked 345 Times in 258 Posts
|
Quote:
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries" |
|
12-05-2018, 12:06 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Saunders Bay
Posts: 99
Thanks: 128
Thanked 20 Times in 15 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
12-05-2018, 12:09 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,528
Thanks: 748
Thanked 345 Times in 258 Posts
|
was being sarcastic
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries" |
12-05-2018, 01:23 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 527
Thanks: 83
Thanked 194 Times in 118 Posts
|
Just so I get this right... it's NOT the landowners that removed the vegetation and changed the shoreline that's responsible for the erosion... it's the boaters? Makes perfect sense to me! The real problem is that you can't fix stupid.
|
12-05-2018, 01:31 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
This is NOT adding a law, it is not changing anything. It is trying to clarify that you can't just go 6 MPH as many of you argue, but that NO WAKE means just that.
|
12-06-2018, 10:56 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,243
Thanks: 1,151
Thanked 944 Times in 586 Posts
|
Actually, these are two separate problems. Both cause erosion, independently of each other. And of course when combined, it's even worse.
|
12-05-2018, 01:36 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,758
Thanks: 31
Thanked 432 Times in 204 Posts
|
So the purpose of this bill is to get people to go SLOWER than 6mph in no wake zones? Seriously?
I live on the Bear Island NWZ and would love it if people went through under 12mph. In the summer about one boat every hour, on average, goes through at FULL SPEED! I think about half of them don't know they are in a NWZ and the other half don't care. Plus most boater have an exaggerated idea of what 6mph is. If Capt. Dunleavy wants to actually do something constructive about NWZ violations he should send a patrol boat out to Bear and have them hide around the corner. Usually the patrol boats sit out in plain sight. This causes people to act like good citizens... until the patrol boat leaves. |
12-05-2018, 01:48 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
The purpose is to make people understand that NO Wake is just that, BI. To make people understand that it's not Headway Speed, not 6 MPH, it's NO WAKE. You are right though. It needs to be enforced if anything is going to change no matter how they write the law.
|
12-05-2018, 02:30 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,758
Thanks: 31
Thanked 432 Times in 204 Posts
|
Quote:
I have had people tell me they take their PWC through the NWZ at full speed because they don't produce and appreciable wake at high speeds. Which is true. However they are clearly violating the 6mph rule. Hydrofoils produce very little wake. Will they be able to go through NWZs at high speed under the new rule? How about ground effect boats that actually fly a couple of feet above the water and never touch the water when at speed? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiLxXWgwj0M Anyway in most instances NWZs are not about wake, they are about safe speed in a congested area. I took part in advocating for the BI NWZ, and I don't think the word erosion was ever used by us. It was about safety. |
|
12-05-2018, 02:39 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 332
Thanks: 0
Thanked 242 Times in 81 Posts
|
Quote:
Consider the following. A boat in Paugus Bay wants to get through the Weirs Channel. Normal current in the Weirs Channel is about 1.5 MPH, but if the Lakeport Dam is letting out lots of water the current can get upwards of 4 MPH. If, for example, the current in the Weirs Channel is 2.5 MPH, and the boat can maintain steerage way at 3 MPH, then it will take the boater one hour to get through the half-mile NO-WAKE zone. What happens if the boat behind him needs 4 MPH to maintain steerage way and there is no room for passing? Last September, I was made aware of this bill. When Bizer did its annual survey in September, I was piloting a boat that could maintain steerageway at about 2 MPH. According to the GPS, I was going 5.1 MPH when this photo of my wake was taken. Those are ripples, not a wake. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Bizer For This Useful Post: | ||
AC2717 (12-05-2018) |
12-05-2018, 09:44 AM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 93
Thanks: 78
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
12-05-2018, 03:12 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
|
12-05-2018, 03:16 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
I mean the twisting and turning people will go thru to try and justify something. They are finally getting things right. If you see white behind you you are making a wake. Get over it!
Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
The Following User Says Thank You to The Real BigGuy For This Useful Post: | ||
tis (12-05-2018) |
12-05-2018, 05:59 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tiera Verdi Fl & Moultonborough
Posts: 298
Thanks: 115
Thanked 154 Times in 92 Posts
|
The State of NewHampshire has more laws and restrictions on boating then any other state in the country. In Florida we have substantially more boats per cap.
And basically stick with the Coast Guard guidelines . The lake is used heavy about 8 week ends a year but we have restrictions that imply full usage 365 days a year. Lighten up with this crap |
12-05-2018, 06:26 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
|
There are those that really believe it is possible to legislate the stupidity out of people.
My opinion of this language change is that to me it creates more ambiguity in the sense that it doesn't specify a maximum speed. At least with 6 MPH it indicated a bit of a measuring stick - not that it was perfect but its something. If a captain doesn't get 6 MPH what makes you think they will understand "the minimum speed necessary to maintain safe steerage". |
12-05-2018, 06:28 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
Maxum, all you need to do to see if you are making a wake is look behind you. How easy is that?
|
12-05-2018, 06:45 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 475
Thanks: 179
Thanked 158 Times in 100 Posts
|
You can change the law all you want, but I bet any amount of money it will have NO impact on anyone's behavior towards their wake, and NOTHING will change... Complete waste of time.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Cal Coon For This Useful Post: | ||
Lake Charm (12-29-2018) |
12-06-2018, 07:27 AM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 342
Thanks: 116
Thanked 42 Times in 39 Posts
|
Wake Watchers
The lady on the point at Y Landing has scared many of us into dead slow by yelling and flailing her arms, tho
|
12-06-2018, 10:40 AM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,101
Thanks: 1,247
Thanked 1,542 Times in 1,000 Posts
|
I agree that NH should have boating laws that are similar to other states. However, as long as we have the 150 foot safe passage law, NWZ in places like Bear Island and Eagle Island should be unnecessary.
|
12-06-2018, 11:17 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,758
Thanks: 31
Thanked 432 Times in 204 Posts
|
Quote:
Before the BI NWZ was created we would sit on the porch and watch the near misses. The area between Bear and Pine was the definition of an accident waiting to happen. The combination of high speed, high volume and going around a blind corner was treacherous. There were collisions, I don't remember the numbers. |
|
12-06-2018, 11:45 AM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Meredith Bay & LI, NY
Posts: 3,220
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,007 Times in 648 Posts
|
Completely disagree. Many boaters can't even measure the 150ft in their head, never mind obeying the law itself (If they even know the law exists). The NWZ is absolutely needed especially in those two particular areas.
|
12-06-2018, 07:47 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 475
Thanks: 179
Thanked 158 Times in 100 Posts
|
I have read about this crazy lady a few times on here now, so I'm looking forward to taking a ride by next summer to see if I can attract her attention just for the entertainment value..!!
|
12-06-2018, 08:59 PM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,660
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 348
Thanked 624 Times in 280 Posts
|
Low Wake anyone?
We could use a low wake zone to go with the no wake zone. The no wake signs seem silly in some spots, but spot on in others. A no wake should mean it, but allowing up to 6mph in a low wake zone would get better compliance than expecting everyone to crawl along.
__________________
-lg |
12-07-2018, 01:17 AM | #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,758
Thanks: 31
Thanked 432 Times in 204 Posts
|
Quote:
Perhaps you are passing by her property at too great a speed. I recommend slowing down before you get to her area and see what she does. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post: | ||
Descant (12-07-2018) |
12-07-2018, 05:46 AM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bear Island/Fort Myers, Fla
Posts: 229
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 1
Thanked 59 Times in 41 Posts
|
No wake Zones are about Safety
No wake zones are about safety not erosion within the no wake zone. My observations are that no wake zones actually increase erosion in the shoreline adjacent to the areas just outside the no wake zone. Boats on plane generate a wake of X. Boats coming off or to plane create a wake of 4X. If it were about erosion we should have no areas where we cause 100 % of the boats traveling an area come off plane and return to cruising speed. Over the years boats on the lake have become progressively larger and faster. This makes tight areas smaller and more dangerous requiring the captain to be precise in navigating tight areas to maintain 150 feet. Mix that with a large variation of the captain's skill level and knowledge of the lake and you have a situation ripe for an accident. While no fan of no-wake zones they reflect the reality of what is required to keep us all safe.
|
12-07-2018, 06:29 AM | #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 663
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
12-07-2018, 08:49 AM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 583
Thanks: 130
Thanked 258 Times in 161 Posts
|
Based on the comments on this thread and others, the whole idea here will not solve any real or perceived issues. Those who flagrantly disregard NWZs, either by choice or ignorance, will continue to do so as will those who parse the language looking for inconsistencies or things that are open for interpretation.
Moreover, it would be really interesting to see increased MP presence and enforcement. My guess is that should that happen, there would be lots of complaints about cost, MP being in the wrong place, unjust tickets, etc. I'm confident I know what to do when I encounter a NWZ now and should the wording change. Most important, I get a kick out of reading different thoughts and opinions on the subject here on the forum! |
The Following User Says Thank You to Garcia For This Useful Post: | ||
Shreddy (12-07-2018) |
12-07-2018, 09:22 AM | #36 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 42
Thanks: 0
Thanked 23 Times in 12 Posts
|
More MP Officers? Yes, I would agree! Last year I think I saw 4 MP boats total, all season!! Except for the 4th of July. I really didn’t see any MP boats on the 4th either, however I did see a lot of blue lights!!
Of the four I did see, two were at the same time. We were coming out of the Weirs channel heading into the big lake. We passed two marine patrol boats, they were heading into the channel. The first MP boat had two MP officers on it. I waved, they both waved back. The second MP boat, the old war horse boat, had three MP officers on board. I waved, two waved back, the third told me to slow down!!! REALY!! |
12-07-2018, 09:25 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 583
Thanks: 130
Thanked 258 Times in 161 Posts
|
In case it wasn't clear from my post, I am all for an increased, more visible presence of the MP!
|
12-07-2018, 10:27 AM | #38 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 42
Thanks: 0
Thanked 23 Times in 12 Posts
|
Quote:
I guess I was pointing out that even the MP officers don't agree on what the proper boat speed. I was clearly going slow, I bet I wasn't doing 3 MPH against the current. I guess I can say 4 out of 5 officers agreed with me LOL!! |
|
12-07-2018, 10:32 AM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island, not that one, the one on Winnipesaukee
Posts: 2,836
Thanks: 1,019
Thanked 885 Times in 518 Posts
|
These threads help me remember why I stepped out of fighting hard for boating rights in NH.... everyone has there own thoughts. And there are valid points to most arguments. But no one ever seems to want to discuss compromise.
Do a search on "what does no wake mean" You will find plenty of definitions most notably this one: http://wow.uscgaux.info/Uploads_wowII/095-45-01/Slow_No_Wake.pdf What most all the definitions have in common is that there is no mention of speed relative to no wake. This law will do what some of us have been fighting for years for, which is to bring the NH legislation in line with Federal laws, concerning boating regulations.
__________________
Life is about how much time you can spend relaxing... I do it on an island that isn't really an island..... |
12-07-2018, 12:49 PM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 572
Thanks: 122
Thanked 244 Times in 130 Posts
|
Cry me a river!
The article in the original post stated that some guy on Governor's Island was complaining about erosion caused by wakes of boats going 6 mph. Give me a break! As I've said in prior posts, what about those of us that are subjected to 3 foot rollers coming in from wake surf boats and cruisers? What about those people that live on Locke's Island facing mainland? This is not a no-wake zone, and these people are subjected to huge amounts of traffic and substantial wakes. Come see the damage to my shoreline that these wakes cause, then talk to me about erosion. But as I also said before, I knew what I was getting into when I bought the property, so I'm not complaining about the erosion or the traffic. What I am complaining about are the people that are crying over a ripple of water or "white foam" behind a boat that is going slower than a duck swimming.
Let's just make the entire lake a no-wake zone, then see what the next thing is that people will complain about. |
The Following User Says Thank You to Little Bear For This Useful Post: | ||
Cal Coon (12-07-2018) |
12-07-2018, 01:08 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
|
Even the USCG Aux states the following in their no wake definition:
It has nothing to do with you actually making a small wake or not. The speed and maintaining steerage depends on your boat and boat characteristics. DING DING DING, exactly, although as I previously stated the ability to confidently maintain safe steerage is a direct reflection of the driver's skill and ability to handle whatever boat they are operating and the circumstance and conditions at the time. Thus the relationship between wake size and a designated NWZ that everyone seems to think should be wave free is fundamentally flawed. |
The Following User Says Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post: | ||
Little Bear (12-07-2018) |
12-09-2018, 06:54 AM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 190
Thanks: 695
Thanked 56 Times in 40 Posts
|
Or better yet
Quote:
|
|
12-07-2018, 06:10 PM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bear Island/Fort Myers, Fla
Posts: 229
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 1
Thanked 59 Times in 41 Posts
|
Yes as crazy as it seems that whole no wake zone was extended due to documented injuries at Meredith Marina due to the large amount of wake in the area. All of Meredith bay is travelled pretty much in a north south direction so there is no confusion in the sea to break up wake.
|
12-07-2018, 08:44 AM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,820
Thanks: 2,111
Thanked 753 Times in 538 Posts
|
Lakes Region—Meet City-Speeds
Quote:
Using a 28-footer for waterskiing or tubing in a harbor long-protected by Mother Nature will erode the shoreline. Too often, relaxing on my dock, I'll get wet—can't hear my radio—or have to put a caller on hold. At one time, we had no boatlifts, seawalls or breakwaters in Winter Harbor. These days, they're popping up like mushrooms after an August rain. Alas, we have no Low-Wake zones—and only one tiny No-Wake area—especially sensible so Loons still can raise their families. If you've come to the Lakes Region to maintain your hectic "city-speed", you've come to the wrong place.
__________________
Every MP who enters Winter Harbor will pass by my porch of 67 years... |
|
12-07-2018, 06:24 AM | #45 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 342
Thanks: 116
Thanked 42 Times in 39 Posts
|
Wake Watcher
Quote:
|
|
12-06-2018, 05:25 PM | #46 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
|
Quote:
Furthermore in the absence of any specific parameters governing speed or size it's a judgment call of the captain and those vary greatly. Again good luck with that. I get what the spirit of the law is in regards to "no wake" but when somebody comes through a NWZ plowing water and you get mad - just remember that under the current definition it's the slowest possible speed and still maintain steerage. Well this this example maybe the captain feels that going that fast is needed to comfortably meet (for him or her) that requirement. Are they breaking the law? After all when you've got some decent forward momentum it's far easier to maintain a straight course of travel than if you're barely moving and trying to do the same thing. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post: | ||
Prestige Worldwide (04-13-2019) |
12-06-2018, 06:34 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
I disagree with you. I have watched plenty of boats causing no visible wake. I think if Marine Patrol had a bigger presence in NW Zones, almost ALL boats could manage to somehow maintain steerage without making a wake Funny that.
|
02-22-2019, 11:33 AM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 191
Thanks: 93
Thanked 84 Times in 55 Posts
|
Florida
Quote:
Winni has a speed limit, 150 foot rule, and No wake zones. Florida is far more restrictive than NH. If people just uses common sense we would have less rules and laws because 90% of us would follow common sense. Last edited by Not to Worry; 02-23-2019 at 09:16 AM. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Not to Worry For This Useful Post: | ||
upthesaukee (02-22-2019) |
02-22-2019, 01:32 PM | #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 583
Thanks: 130
Thanked 258 Times in 161 Posts
|
|
02-22-2019, 02:23 PM | #50 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island, not that one, the one on Winnipesaukee
Posts: 2,836
Thanks: 1,019
Thanked 885 Times in 518 Posts
|
People People People, can we let this rest...... I think we are beating this topic to death... We all have our opinions right wrong or indifferent.... Voice you opinion to your state official, in the end they will do what they feel is right and we will live with it....
__________________
Life is about how much time you can spend relaxing... I do it on an island that isn't really an island..... |
12-06-2018, 06:46 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
|
12-07-2018, 08:46 AM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
Geez, the lake is beautiful! Slow down and enjoy it.
Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
01-05-2019, 10:56 PM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Londonderry & Moultonborough
Posts: 139
Thanks: 81
Thanked 23 Times in 17 Posts
|
|
01-06-2019, 10:16 AM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
|
|
02-14-2019, 05:26 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,101
Thanks: 1,247
Thanked 1,542 Times in 1,000 Posts
|
House Committee Report
HB 188, amending the definition of headway speed. OUGHT TO PASS.
Rep. Patricia Bushway for Resources, Recreation and Development. This bill removes from the definition of headway speed the reference to 6 miles per hour and establishes headway speed as the slowest speed that a boat can be operated and maintain the ability to steer. The current definition that specifies 6 miles per hour is too fast for some watercraft because they still create a wake. For some other craft, the speed may be too slow to maintain steerage. The committee decision was informed by the input of the Marine Patrol. Vote 19-0. The "Ought To Pass" Recommendation was adopted today by the whole house on a voice vote. |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post: | ||
FlyingScot (02-14-2019), Loub52 (02-14-2019) |
02-15-2019, 06:48 AM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-15-2019, 10:05 AM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,243
Thanks: 1,151
Thanked 944 Times in 586 Posts
|
Quote:
Let's keep the objections to this bill on stuff that's at least fact-based and tied to the English language. Stuff like--"But I gotta get to Twin Docks before they fill up!" or "I hate going 4 mph through this miserable place!" |
|
02-15-2019, 10:43 AM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 2,925
Thanks: 657
Thanked 2,168 Times in 910 Posts
|
I think one of the major problems with legislators making rules for boating is that (I would be willing to bet) most of them have not ever owned or spent any significant time in a boat. Many have never spent even one minute on Winnipesaukee.
They tend to use their life experiences when voting on boating issues and sometimes that results in regulations for boaters that are not quite right. Some of the problems result when they think things like "We have ..................on Route 93 so we must need it on the lakes". The lack of information or practical experience on their part sometimes causes changes that are not necessary or regulations that have a negative impact on the people who actually use and enjoy the lake. |
02-15-2019, 11:48 AM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
I'm not being silly, I'm being realistic. There's a reason "6MPH" is in the law now, this is the reason. IF they want to make a realisticchange, just make it 5 MPH. |
|
02-15-2019, 01:25 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,101
Thanks: 1,247
Thanked 1,542 Times in 1,000 Posts
|
Ethics in action
The Marine Trades Association used to take legislators out on the lake every year, from the committees that dealt with lake issues. The legislature passed new ethics rules that prevented Reps from accepting anything in excess of a $25 value. It wasn't clear what the value of a boat ride, sandwich and ice cream cone was, so they stopped.
When we were in a kerfuffle about speed limits, a group of legislators borrowed a radar gun and did their own research on speeds and noise. That was discussed, I believe, here, but could have been on one of the speed related websites. Marine Patrol will probably take out any legislator who asks. (Our local PD will take any adult resident for a ride-along.) As with anything else, educating somebody does not necessarily mean they will end up agreeing with what you or I think is the obvious. |
02-15-2019, 03:42 PM | #61 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,526
Thanks: 3,135
Thanked 1,090 Times in 784 Posts
|
Perception vs Reality
Did not hear about the group that went out on its own with a radar gun, but I do know Rusty Mclear rented a large pontoon boat and took out legislatures to the Weirs on a weekend in the middle of a poker run. The poker run was slow in front of the Weirs due to traffic and boat waves, someone told the legislatures they were going 100 mph. Since they only saw the weekend traffic in front of the Weirs, they were lead to believe this is normal throughout the whole lake!
Quote:
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day. |
|
02-15-2019, 06:05 PM | #62 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,243
Thanks: 1,151
Thanked 944 Times in 586 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to FlyingScot For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (02-15-2019) |
02-15-2019, 06:35 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
|
Just googled NH Marine Trades Association and learned it is a political action committee, or a PAC, and is located at 65 Gold St in Laconia, and what's also interesting is that 65 Gold St is also the address for Lakeport Landing Marina.
Back in 2008, Lakeport Landing Marina was very big with its opposition to the Lake Winnipesaukee 45-mph speed limit, so having the same address raises a red flag on this no-wake speed issue. In motor boating, the size of the boat makes a difference, and what works good for say a 16' boat with a 40-hp motor, can be a lot different for a 27' or 32' boat with a 900-hp motor; how it putt-putts along slowly cruis'n down a no-wake zone. Just seems like for these big powerful, mega monster, big money BEHEMOTHs ....the putt-putt speed is just too danged slow of a putt-putt .... and the boat captain is always aching to put the pedal to the metal ..... push that throttle(s) way forward ..... power it up ...... and move on up and outta that no-wake zone ...... as long as there's no Marine Patrol nearby ..... big, fast, powerful boats just want to go fast ..... is what it seems?
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
The Following User Says Thank You to fatlazyless For This Useful Post: | ||
FlyingScot (02-16-2019) |
02-15-2019, 03:37 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hopkinton, MA / Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 52
Thanks: 1
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
Steerageway: (of a vessel) the minimum speed required for proper response to the helm.
If you want to go forward and you are going backwards you do not have proper response to the helm. |
02-15-2019, 07:54 PM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
Quote:
You are being silly. There is no way you could keep your bow directly in the current, all boats wander. As soon as your bow came off 180 degrees to the current you would fall off, effectively losing steerage. Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
|
02-16-2019, 07:59 AM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
I think it's about time this wording got corrected for the way that MP intends it to be on the lake. There will no longer be any question. No Wake will now mean NO Wake to everybody without any misunderstandings.
|
02-16-2019, 01:42 PM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 103
Thanks: 51
Thanked 49 Times in 27 Posts
|
Everyone who is a resident of NH should contact their representative and tell them to vote NO on this foolish bill. Those of us who are not residents cannot vote in NH, although it still would not hurt to call.
|
02-17-2019, 03:42 PM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,101
Thanks: 1,247
Thanked 1,542 Times in 1,000 Posts
|
Don't call your rep
As noted above (#90?) the House voted on this already. Too late to call your Rep. A hearing will be scheduled in the Senate and they will vote later.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post: | ||
Chimi (02-18-2019) |
02-18-2019, 02:58 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 103
Thanks: 51
Thanked 49 Times in 27 Posts
|
|
02-17-2019, 06:09 AM | #70 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-15-2019, 11:20 AM | #71 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hopkinton, MA / Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 52
Thanks: 1
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-15-2019, 11:42 AM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
|
02-16-2019, 02:33 PM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 583
Thanks: 130
Thanked 258 Times in 161 Posts
|
Quote:
This poster’s scenario is definitely not going to create a wake, nor will he receive a ticket. If I have to choose between the two scenarios, and it seems we all do as there is always that group looking for loopholes rather use common sense and follow the intent of the law, I opt for the revisions to the rule. |
|
02-19-2019, 10:32 AM | #74 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 817
Thanks: 113
Thanked 204 Times in 127 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-19-2019, 12:55 PM | #75 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
I never meant to imply how speed needs to be measured, I just think there needs to be an actual measurable and articulable limit expressed in speed over ground, not an arbitrary one expressed as the ability to steer. I don't really care what the limit is, but there needs to be one, otherwise you end up with confusion and tickets based on someone's opinion of how slowly someone else should go and still be able to steer. I cannot imagine why we'd ever want to define a law this way when there is a superior alternative (miles per hour) that's been in use for decades in the state.
|
02-19-2019, 01:29 PM | #76 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,952
Thanks: 80
Thanked 971 Times in 433 Posts
|
Dave R.... I agree. The current law sets that number as 6MPH.
Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
02-19-2019, 02:25 PM | #77 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 817
Thanks: 113
Thanked 204 Times in 127 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-19-2019, 03:24 PM | #78 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 687 Times in 425 Posts
|
What is the speed of the current?
Question:
The speed of a boat in still water is 30 mph. It takes the same time for the boat to travel 5 miles upstream as it does to travel 10 miles downstream. What is the speed of the current. Don't google this to get the answer, all you captains should be able to answer it by your vast experience.
__________________
It's never crowded along the extra mile. |
02-19-2019, 04:14 PM | #79 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 583
Thanks: 130
Thanked 258 Times in 161 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-19-2019, 05:43 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 738
Thanks: 4
Thanked 256 Times in 168 Posts
|
Shall I post the simple one-equation/one-unknown algebra solution, or should I wait and not ruin the puzzle for others?
|
02-19-2019, 06:40 PM | #81 |
Senior Member
|
The correct answer to the question asked is the current is 5-mph, except in the real world of boating in the Weirs channel, you need to consider the different drag coefficient for each boat.
A 16' fishing boat with a 40-hp outboard can weigh 800-lbs, while a 27' cruiser with twin 450-hp inboards can weigh maybe 10,000-lbs. The length, weight, and surface friction work together to determine the drag coefficient, and how each boat is effected by the 5-mph current, plus the hull is effected by the wind, too.
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
02-20-2019, 06:30 AM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
|
02-20-2019, 08:51 AM | #83 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Quote:
__________________
Getting ready for winter! |
|
02-20-2019, 09:10 AM | #84 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,952
Thanks: 80
Thanked 971 Times in 433 Posts
|
We have a de-facto speed limit of 6MPH now... We have that because conditions are variable, and every boat has a different steerage speed.
I would propose that we remove the NWZ definition and just replace it with a 5MPH zone. Easily definable, and easy to enforce! Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
02-20-2019, 11:56 AM | #85 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-20-2019, 01:33 PM | #86 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 2,925
Thanks: 657
Thanked 2,168 Times in 910 Posts
|
Quote:
"No wake" speeds are about twice what they are on Winnipessaukee and there is no safe passage law. If you go through a no wake zone in Florida at the same speed you would go through the Weirs Channel you could get rear ended. I think that different interpretation partially explains why so many boats with out of state registrations go through the Weirs Channel throwing a significant wake and have no idea that they are doing anything wrong. It means different things to different people in other states. Even without a safe passage law it always surprises me in Florida when another boat overtakes and passes mine at 30 to 40 MPH and is almost close enough that you could shake the Captain's hand. I think so many people are just unaware of the wake behind them and how much it affects other boats they pass. We have it pretty good on Winnipesaukee and most boat operators are courteous and respectful. The state could have stopped making new boating laws and new No Wake zones on Winnipesaukee about 15 years ago and we might all be better off. |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TiltonBB For This Useful Post: | ||
chipj29 (02-21-2019), Seaplane Pilot (02-20-2019) |
02-20-2019, 01:41 PM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 663
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
And the good news is....
While MP wastes their resources busting people for making white foam and ripples smaller than a duck makes, they will not be bothering me while I cruise (safely) in the Broads at 65-70. Lemonade out of lemons!
|
02-20-2019, 01:56 PM | #88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,952
Thanks: 80
Thanked 971 Times in 433 Posts
|
Just like the Speed Limit proponents said when that debate was raging...
You need an actual NUMBER to allow for enforcement, as "reasonable & prudent" was too vague. The same goes here... you need a number. Different boats have different steerage speeds. How do you differentiate? How can you tell if they are going over their "maintain steerage" speed? At what height does a wake become a violation? How do you write a ticket for that? Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
02-20-2019, 07:28 PM | #89 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,820
Thanks: 2,111
Thanked 753 Times in 538 Posts
|
"Where the Men are Good-Looking"...
Quote:
|
|
02-20-2019, 02:15 PM | #90 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dave R For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (05-29-2019), Woodsy (02-20-2019) |
02-20-2019, 09:14 AM | #91 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 583
Thanks: 130
Thanked 258 Times in 161 Posts
|
Quote:
As to GPS in a boat, perhaps I’m the exception to the rule. I’ve driven a wide range of boats during my five decades on the lake and only the most recent has had GPS - in fact, most have not had a speedometer. In my current boat I rarely turn on the GPS; I’ve never felt the need to use it to monitor my speed in a NWZ or anywhere else. I feel confident I can get through a NWZ safely and efficiently - and my guess is so can anyone else on this forum. That said, it is interesting in these winter months to talk about boating - ice out is not far away! |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Garcia For This Useful Post: | ||
Senior Chief (05-30-2019) |
02-20-2019, 10:53 AM | #92 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,536
Thanks: 1,061
Thanked 652 Times in 363 Posts
|
One solution
I've got the answer to the problem in the Weirs Channel. Block off boat access to the channel. Winnipesaukee boats stay in Winnipesaukee proper, and Paugus Bay boats stay in Paugus Bay. Problem solved.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Pineedles For This Useful Post: | ||
RTTOOL (02-23-2019) |
02-20-2019, 12:11 PM | #93 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 726
Thanked 1,397 Times in 968 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
02-20-2019, 12:25 PM | #94 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,976
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
FWIW, I've had GPS on my boats since 2005 and use it extensively. My latest boat has two GPS plotters (a 10 year old one that still works great, and a brand new one that displays Active Captain). I plan to augment them with a tablet running Navionics as well. I explore/cruise (off Winni) quite a bit and like to have as much information as possible to avoid touching bottom. One of the props or shafts on my latest boat costs more than the tablet, the newer GPS, and the Navionics app combined, so it's money well-spent if it keeps the props and shafts straight. I think Active Captain is a must for anyone that likes to do multi-day cruises too, it's super handy. |
|
02-20-2019, 02:48 PM | #95 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
Quote:
Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to The Real BigGuy For This Useful Post: | ||
tis (02-21-2019) |
02-20-2019, 03:23 PM | #96 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,952
Thanks: 80
Thanked 971 Times in 433 Posts
|
Quote:
However... all it takes is 1 loser to go thru the Weirs Channel at 2MPH on a busy summer Saturday to cause a boat traffic jam 1/2-3/4 of a mile long. Resulting in 40+ boats having to shift in and out of gear to try and maintain steerage in a 2-3 knot current. So again the effect on others? Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
02-16-2019, 06:50 PM | #97 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,990
Thanks: 1,154
Thanked 1,971 Times in 1,219 Posts
|
The NWZ discussion is one more indication that the human species is doomed.
Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk |
The Following User Says Thank You to thinkxingu For This Useful Post: | ||
TheRoBoat (02-16-2019) |
02-17-2019, 06:59 AM | #98 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,169
Thanks: 119
Thanked 419 Times in 251 Posts
|
You don’t know what your talking about or, you’ve never driven a boat at headway speed. Yes they work like that. Try holding the helm in one position and see what happens. You’ll turn slightly in one direction then turn slightly in the other. Against a current that is pushing you backwards (your example) the boat would not be able to recover even if you turned into the current. The only reason you go straight in normal conditions is because you have the velocity to overcome the velocity of the water.
Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app |
02-17-2019, 07:30 AM | #99 |
Senior Member
|
..... a Neanderthal can steer a motor boat!
At no wake speed of 6-mph, the larger hull of a bigger boat makes it more difficult for the captain to maintain the desired direction. Not enough engine torque to control it against wind, waves, and current.
Is just like trying to paddle a stand up paddle board using just your hands, and not the paddle, with the sup gets pushed by wind, waves and current. Moving water can have a lot of resistance working against the hull, and more resistance working against a bigger hull. See ...... you need to get a smaller boat!
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
02-17-2019, 07:47 AM | #100 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: The humbling river
Posts: 302
Thanks: 42
Thanked 78 Times in 55 Posts
|
If steerage is lost then why is it all boats don't loop around and end up in the ocean?
The physics at play do not require a vessel to overcome the velocity of the water as the hull is not acting as a dam. |
Bookmarks |
|
|