Kayak Cut in Half in Meredith

[ITD]

A guy at Shep Brown's told me a kayak was cut in half last night at 1:30 am by a power boat. The kayak was supposedly out with no lights. The powerboat didn't stop. No one was injured, the kayak couple was over at Shep's this morning looking for the boat. I'm thinking they should be renamed to Mr and Mrs Bonehead if they were out on a kayak at night with no light, lucky to be alive.

[Lakewinniboater]

I agree whole heartedly! No common sense

[hazelnut]

So this "couple" was over at Browns looking for the boat that hit them?!?! FOR WHAT? To tell them "hey we're the IDIOTS who were Kayaking at NIGHT with no lights, that you hit."

I have no experience in this but my guess is that hitting a Kayak at night might feel like hitting a large wake or debris in the water. Who's to say the power boat operators didn't think they hit a log or cruiser wake.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

But What possesses someone to go out with no lights at night? Beyond that a kayak is so low in the water that they are hard to see in the daylight! Again I am glad no one was injured, but I find fault with the operator of the kayak plain and simple!

[sa meredith]

While I certainly agree with the posts written here, let's not excuse the power boat captain completely. There is never an excuse that makes it "OK" for a boater to hit something in the water. Even at night, you need to watch what is in front of you.

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

... There is never an excuse that makes it "OK" for a boater to hit something in the water. Even at night, you need to watch what is in front of you.

Even in daylight people hit debris. I think your statement is over-broad and not realistic. Unless you run with dock lights, on or continously using a spot light you are not going to able to see much in the water at night, probably not even at headway speed. If you meant it's "never ok to ram another boat" I'd have to agree with that.

An unlighted kayak blends in with the water unless it's silhouetted by another light. I've almost hit one myself coming into a private dock. I believe you dont have to have a light turned on when operating a muscle powerred vessel at night but it does have to be accessibe so you can make your presence known.

As for hitting something major and not stopping, I think that was defintly wrong-doing on the part of the motor-boat operator. I'm sure it would be more noticible than a large wake. If they simply didnt realise at that time there was another craft involved it would have been prudent to inspect for damage to their own boat and drive. I hope they find the operator. Someone defintly needs some clarification on how to behave on the water.

[MAINLANDER]

No word of it in any news outlet, no one at sheps herd such a story, I call bs.
Bear Island resident maybe???

[macshpman]

Just watched news nine and they talked about it happening last night

[Skip]

Originally Posted by macshpman

Just watched news nine and they talked about it happening last night

As stated above, the AP has reported the story but with very few initial details.

Once again you can peruse the short article HERE on today's on-line edition of the Union Leader.

By the way, love or hate the editorial slant of the Union Leader they are by far the best and most accurate source of breaking news here in New Hampshire!

IMHO

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Skip

"...By the way, love or hate the editorial slant of the Union Leader they are by far the best and most accurate source of breaking news here in New Hampshire...!"

From the article:

"Spitzer's kayak had no lights."

Does the reporter know if the kayak wasn't equipped with lights, or that Spitzer didn't have a light displayed?

Dang reporters....

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Kamper

I believe you dont have to have a light turned on when operating a muscle powerred vessel at night but it does have to be accessibe so you can make your presence known.

Sorry, the light must be displayed and visible for 360° around the horizon for a distance of 2 miles.

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by NightWing

Sorry, ...

http://boat-ed.com/nh/handbook/lights.htm

You are correct. I have a mental picture of a rowboater waving a lantern that must have come from a safety course I took many many years ago. The current rule is smarter.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Kamper

http://boat-ed.com/nh/handbook/lights.htm

You are correct. I have a mental picture of a rowboater waving a lantern that must have come from a safety course I took many many years ago. The current rule is smarter.

As Nightwing correctly stated, the vessel in question should have been displaying a single white light visible for two miles in all directions.

Here is the applicable Administrative Rule:

Saf-C 403.16 Lights on Non-Power Boats.

(a) Boats propelled by oars, paddles or other human or natural device except sails, operated on any public water, shall, between sunset and sunrise, display one white light in a conspicuous position, so placed as to show all around the horizon.

The two mile requirement is found in a subsection of the preceding rule that basically states white lights shall be visible for two miles and all other colored navigation lights (if required) visible for one mile.

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by Kamper

I hope they find the operator. Someone defintly needs some clarification on how to behave on the water.

Behaving on the water means maintaining a proper watch. Suppose the kayak was within 150 feet of shore, he wouldn't be earning a ticket to my thinking.

[jrc]

Kamper, you would be right in coast guard controlled waters but NH has a stricter rule.

Rule 25 in part:
...
A vessel under oars may exhibit the lights prescribed in this rule for sailing vessels, but if she does not, she shall have ready at hand an electric torch or lighted lantern showing a white light which shall be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent collision.
...



Gavia, there is no provision to allow dark running near shore, two wrongs...

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

... Suppose the kayak was within 150 feet of shore, he wouldn't be earning a ticket to my thinking.

The kayak in your scenario is still a boat covered by boat regs any time it's in the water. The MP might ignore a pool toy in daylight, close to shore but if you take an inner tube that far out you can expect negative attention if you don't have a PFD. A kayak, canoe, rowboat, or any boat without adequate lights, might as well be a mine. Just another hazard to navigation.

Not all factory installed lights are adequate either (imo). Boaters should leave their lights on at the dock some night and walk off a bit. Those little dime-size green/red lights aren't the attention getters you might want them to be.

Also, it looks like I implied there was only one person needing a talking to but I'm not overly sympathetic to the kayaker either. I'm glad no one got hurt but that was luck. He might as well have been playing Russian Roulette.

Originally Posted by jrc

Rule 25 in part: ... which shall be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent collision. ...

As I remembered it, the woman was rowing and the guy was smiling as he waved the lantern!

[Island Life]

Originally Posted by Kamper

Not all factory installed lights are adequate either (imo). Boaters should leave their lights on at the dock some night and walk off a bit. Those little dime-size green/red lights arent the attention getters you ight want them to be.

Can't agree more. I was following a white light last night, not quite knowing which direction he was going because he appeared to have no bow lights. Only when I got pretty close did I see a faint green light. I've always assumed my own were sufficient but now I will check. Can you have brighter bow lights retrofitted?

[NightWing]

The visibility requirement for red/green bow lights is 1 mile.

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by Island Life

... Can you have brighter bow lights retrofitted?

Yes. You should be able to find compatible lights in any boat catalog or boat part store. Some of them are plain and some are fancy. I changed mine myself.

Good luck!

[Aquadeziac]

Overton's and West Marine both have replecement LED lights for red, green and white marker lights. They are advertised as many times brighter than regular marker lights.
heres an example:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs...&classNum=null

[Tank151]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

While I certainly agree with the posts written here, let's not excuse the power boat captain completely. There is never an excuse that makes it "OK" for a boater to hit something in the water. Even at night, you need to watch what is in front of you.

Simple fact; "The Kayaker" is a BONE-HEAD! I still think this story is a little fishy, but if true, he violated the boating regulations/law requiring PROPER lighting while navigating at night.

Don't blame the captain of the power boat

[Bear Islander]

Obviously the kayaker was in the wrong if he had no light. But his being wrong does not mean the power boat was in the right, they can both be wrong, and I think they are.

This idea that you can fly along at night as long as you don't see any lights is wrong. Floating logs and drifting docks don't have lights. How often do we see damaged markers.

If conditions are such that you can't see something as big as a kayak or canoe then you need to slow down for you own safety.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

This idea that you can fly along at night as long as you don't see any lights is wrong.

I didn't see anyone mention "flying along"

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

I didn't see anyone mention "flying along"

PBR, You see this is the "pro" speed limits way of trying to make this incident fit into their cry for help from all the boats "flying along".

As you pointed out, there was never any mention of speed in this incident.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

PBR, You see this is the "pro" speed limits way of trying to make this incident fit into their cry for help from all the boats "flying along".

As you pointed out, there was never any mention of speed in this incident.

WeirsBeachBoater and Paugus Bay Resident are sniping. Looking through the posts of people they don't like in hopes of finding something they can make into an attack.

The boat had gone from Meredith Bay to Bear Island and was headed back. If it was moving it had a speed, we just don't know what that speed was.

We do know they couldn't see an obstacle in their path before it was to late. Therefore they were going TO fast.

A Meredith resident is in prison right now. He was convicted of operator inattention because he hit another boat at night.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Islander

We do know they couldn't see an obstacle in their path before it was to late. Therefore they were going TO fast.

A Meredith resident is in prison right now. He was convicted of operator inattention because he hit another boat at night.

Who is picking and choosing their words to make this a speed issue? Also, why are you dragging the past into this? We are all aware of the past incident. You only pull it up to cause issues. I am the only one who will step up and call the pro-speed limit side all out as Alarmists, and on the fact that they all try and make every incident a "speed issue". Give it up. Speed isn't the issue, Education, Enforcement of current boating laws will make our lake a better place. Unfortunately we can't teach common sense or courtesy, if we could, none of us would have any gripes to write about on here.

[Island Lover]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

Who is picking and choosing their words to make this a speed issue? Also, why are you dragging the past into this? We are all aware of the past incident. You only pull it up to cause issues. I am the only one who will step up and call the pro-speed limit side all out as Alarmists, and on the fact that they all try and make every incident a "speed issue". Give it up. Speed isn't the issue, Education, Enforcement of current boating laws will make our lake a better place. Unfortunately we can't teach common sense or courtesy, if we could, none of us would have any gripes to write about on here.

New Hampshire must have a lot of alarmists because 78% of registered voters support a speed limit. And 74% think it will make our lakes more enjoyable. Both from an independent poll.

Education and enforcement are wonderful, but they are not making and can not make the changes we need. The speed limit will pass easily this time. Then you will one day notice that the most offensive boats and people have gone to faster waters. And most of us will say GOOD BYE!

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

New Hampshire must have a lot of alarmists because 78% of registered voters support a speed limit. And 74% think it will make our lakes more enjoyable. Both from an independent poll.

Education and enforcement are wonderful, but they are not making and can not make the changes we need. The speed limit will pass easily this time. Then you will one day notice that the most offensive boats and people have gone to faster waters. And most of us will say GOOD BYE!

because your poll of non boaters does not mean a thing to me. Ask people the right question, and anybody can get the desired answer. For example: When people were posed the question, In this day and age with all the worry about the enviroment and global warming, Don't you think we should put a ban on DiHydrogen Monoxide... Overwhelming amounts of people said YES.. Now to those who don't know what it is H2o is another way of stating it. Now if you can convince a majority of those polled that water is bad for them. Imagine how easy it is to get 78% of those polled (by the way most have no boating experience, but they don't mention that) to agree that speed limits are a must have on the lakes.

BTW, isn't this thread hijacked enough. I will make this my last post, unless we move this discussion to appropriate thread in the speed limit forum.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

New Hampshire must have a lot of alarmists because 78% of registered voters support a speed limit. And 74% think it will make our lakes more enjoyable. Both from an independent poll.

This should be taken to the speed limit forum as it brings up the old argument of paid lobbyists "educating" the non-boating population before the survey. It will be sad daywhen the bass boaters are encouraged to stay under 45 just to keep the safe yet "scary" big boats off the big lake.

[michael c]

34 per cent of ALL auto accidents are caused by drunk drivers.

therefore we must also know that 66 per cent of all auto accidents are caused by sober people.... Using your logic , If we all drove around drunk, there would be far fewer auto accidents ....
Anyone can make the numbers fit their situation /viewpoint.

If we stay with the facts and not go off course and begin debating what a boaters responsibilites under THESE conditions or "those conditions" ,,,not
"what if's " and "just suppose"
the Kayakers were out in the middle of the night. they had no lights on .
that is against both the laws of the state of N.H and every other state in the union [ I wonder about california ] the Kayakers were wrong ...period .

the driver of the power boat was going from point A to point B and knew his way, was driving his boat in a lawful way ...the only way for the kayaker to make himself MORE difficult to see ,would be for him to be swimming ,head under water ,using a snorkle !!!
I think anyone who cannot see why this is clear,,,crystal clear , is also in line to file a law suit against Macdonalds for making them fat ....
I apologize to the skipper and his crew for the some subtle and some not so subtle assaults on your abilities ..It is also clear, crystal clear , that these people have Dain Bramage

[Tank151]

Originally Posted by Islander

WeirsBeachBoater and Paugus Bay Resident are sniping. Looking through the posts of people they don't like in hopes of finding something they can make into an attack.

The boat had gone from Meredith Bay to Bear Island and was headed back. If it was moving it had a speed, we just don't know what that speed was.

We do know they couldn't see an obstacle in their path before it was to late. Therefore they were going TO fast.

A Meredith resident is in prison right now. He was convicted of operator inattention because he hit another boat at night.

I believe the boater you're talking about is the guy who's family used to own Channel Marine? I believe he was Drinking (all day) and under the influence, hit the boat, stopped, didn't help or seek assistance, left the scene of the accident and then didn't report to a day or two later...

Different circumstances.... Doesn't take a whole lotta speed from a power boat to sever a Kayak in two.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

This should be taken to the speed limit forum as it brings up the old argument of paid lobbyists "educating" the non-boating population before the survey. It will be sad daywhen the bass boaters are encouraged to stay under 45 just to keep the safe yet "scary" big boats off the big lake.

IMHO, the topic has morphed because of the oft-repeated fact that "...there has never been a kayak struck by a speedboat in the history of Lake Winnipesaukee".

Now there is one—though we don't know the whole story. It's otherwise pretty well documented.

But except for here, no media account mentioned the second kayak involved. Traveling together and being silent in operation, the kayakers would have been aware of the approaching peril. Did the kayaks try to defend themselves using the required sound device? (Bell, horn, whistle?) Was the second kayak lighted in order to protect both boats? Was there a Safe Passage violation of the second kayak?

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

PBR, You see this is the "pro" speed limits way of trying to make this incident fit into their cry for help from all the boats "flying along". As you pointed out, there was never any mention of speed in this incident.

How fast does a speedboat have to go to break off the bow of a kayak—totaling it?

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Did the kayaks try to defend themselves using the required sound device? (Bell, horn, whistle?)

Sound producing devices are not required on manually propelled vessels.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

How fast does a speedboat have to go to break off the bow of a kayak—totaling it?

We can test the theory out. We just have to find out, whether the kayak in question was plastic or fiberglass.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by NightWing

Sound producing devices are not required on manually propelled vessels.

I'm reading that now—nor on unpowered sailboats—tricky wording. (And at the bottom of each page: "It's the LAW!")

Interesting exemption—which would leave a lot of boats defenseless in fog or darkness. Could they have been required in the past? I've attached a whistle to my PFDs for many years.

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

"...you provide the kayak I'll provide the boat..."

Ironically, I have two "unused-lately" kayaks available for a test: the frames are, respectively, wood and aluminum.

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

We can test the theory out. We just have to find out, whether the kayak in question was plastic or fiberglass.

I'd want to know what propeller was used first: there are "cleavers", "choppers", and "rakers" that would make short work of kevlar and aluminum.

[Irrigation Guy]

The BS is getting pretty thick here. To surmise that kayaks will be coming to the lake in greater numbers ,when 1 in 300 boats will no longer be traveling in excess of 45 miles per hour, is a huge stretch at the very least. I'm not a fan of the loud boats, but those loud fast boats are not what make my passengers cringe. Its just the shear numbers of boats, the vast majority traveling at speed of 20-35 miles per hours, that can be intimidating to some. The marine patrol has basically confirmed speeding boats are just not in the majority. When I see them its from a distance, and it doesn't bother me or my passengers in the least.

On the outset of this argument on speed, I thought I might be for it. But, as time goes on, and with the twisting of facts and details, those for it have really lost my respect. They obviously have a larger agenda, I feel its the noise.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by LocalRealtor

The BS is getting pretty thick here. To surmise that kayaks will be coming to the lake in greater numbers ,when 1 in 300 boats will no longer be traveling in excess of 45 miles per hour, is a huge stretch at the very least.

Again, I was talking about the overall effect on tourism - not just on Winni. The current bill, if it becomes law, will impose a speed limit on ALL NH lakes.

Squam has a speed limit - and I see way more paddlers on Squam than on Winni. And when ever I talk to other paddlers about paddling on Winni, they all say the same thing - too many fast boats there for them. So I don't see this as a stretch at all.

I also feel that your 1:300 ratio is way off. A speed limit will certainly affect way more than 1 boat in 300.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

I didn't see anyone mention "flying along"

"Flying along" was in the second paragraph. That paragraph did not refer to the accident. It was about going fast when you can't see what is in front of you.

Many 45/25 speed limit opponents say they favor a night speed limit.

[SAMIAM]

Yuh,right...Island Lover. "Offensive" boaters meaning owners of pricey powerboats. When they leave,all that will be left is the Al Gore moonbats like you with the canoe's and kayaks, your brie and bottled water.....the restaurants,hotels and stores will dry up...and so will the jobs.Sorry to rant,but I am in business in the lakes region.We have 75 employees who rely on tourism.I've said this before on the forum and I'll say it again.These GFB owners that you dispise so much stay in our hotels,eat at our restaurants and shop at our stores...they spend a ton of money because they are wealthy and successful. The engine that drives the lakes region is small business.

[idigtractors]

Originally Posted by ITD

A guy at Shep Brown's told me a kayak was cut in half last night at 1:30 am by a power boat. The kayak was supposedly out with no lights. The powerboat didn't stop. No one was injured, the kayak couple was over at Shep's this morning looking for the boat. I'm thinking they should be renamed to Mr and Mrs Bonehead if they were out on a kayak at night with no light, lucky to be alive.

That bolded, underlined word is a very large word. It could also say the kayak supposedly had lights on it.

[B R]

Originally Posted by idigtractors

That bolded, underlined word is a very large word. It could also say the kayak supposedly had lights on it.

do you really think they had a legal stern light? i think it's at least safe to say they didn't have "legal" lights. red/green and stern light 3' (?) above
the largest occupants head? probably not.


if you look at all the accidents and deaths this year, canoes and kayaks certainly top the list in "most dangerous/unsafe boating vessel".

[Gavia immer]

It was cut in half by a powerboat.....with no injuries? Was it occupied or adrift?

[SteveA]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

It was cut in half by a powerboat.....with no injuries? Was it occupied or adrift?

This story dosn't seem right. Dosn't pass "it could be possible" test

1) " A guy at Shep Brown's told me a kayak was cut in half last night at 1:30 am by a power boat." What guy...?

2) " Noone was injured, the kayak couple was over at Shep's this morning looking for the boat. I'm thinking they should be renamed to Mr and Mrs Bonehead if they were out on a kayak at night with no light, lucky to be alive."

If their kayak was "cut in half" ... how did noone get injured, how did they get to shore? And.... after that drama... why did they decide to go to Shep Browns looking for the villian..instead of the MP or Police?

3) Who in their right mind is on the lake.. power boat or kayak at 1.30 am..?

Story sounds fishy to me. No offense intended ITD This one misses the smell test..

I just looked at the Citizen website.. ( and they report "cat up a tree") no mention of a kayak cut in half.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by SteveA

This story dosn't seem right. Dosn't pass "it could be possible" test

1) " A guy at Shep Brown's told me a kayak was cut in half last night at 1:30 am by a power boat." What guy...?

2) " Noone was injured, the kayak couple was over at Shep's this morning looking for the boat. I'm thinking they should be renamed to Mr and Mrs Bonehead if they were out on a kayak at night with no light, lucky to be alive."

If their kayak was "cut in half" ... how did noone get injured, how did they get to shore? And.... after that drama... why did they decide to go to Shep Browns looking for the villian..instead of the MP or Police?

3) Who in their right mind is on the lake.. power boat or kayak at 1.30 am..?

Story sounds fishy to me. No offense intended ITD This one misses the smell test..

I just looked at the Citizen website.. ( and they report "cat up a tree") no mention of a kayak cut in half.

Wouldn't try to fool ya Steve, just telling what the guy at Shep's told me, I didn't see it, I wasn't there, hence the supposedly, we'll see, if it did happen some crack reporter will eventually find the story.

As for who would be on the lake at 1:30 am , you're kidding right?

[SteveA]

LOL

Guess it's been too long for me to be on the lake that late.... sigh.. stinks getting old!

If we wait for crack reporters here in the LR... you'll be too old to be on the lake @ 1.30AM

[dan]

One went by our house about 10:30. No lights. Bright moon allowed us to see it going by. They are out there.

[Lakegeezer]

Going kayaking in the moonlight is one of the special moments you can have on the lake. While you should take a light with you, turning it on ruins the mood and visibility. Taking risks is one of the spices of life.

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Going kayaking in the moonlight is one of the special moments you can have on the lake. While you should take a light with you, turning it on ruins the mood and visibility. Taking risks is one of the spices of life.

Not turning it on breaks the law and could result in shattered lives.

[The Big Kahuna]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Going kayaking in the moonlight is one of the special moments you can have on the lake. While you should take a light with you, turning it on ruins the mood and visibility. Taking risks is one of the spices of life.

I am all for the spice of life and taking the big risks, good for you to voice your opinion and say to hell with playing it safe. Having said that my spice of life is riding around the lake in a rather good size power boat. Should our paths cross enjoying what we both agree is a zest for life, I hope we will be able not occupy the same space at the same time, and we will both continue to enjoy the lake at special times in our own seperate ways.

[wildwoodfam]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Going kayaking in the moonlight is one of the special moments you can have on the lake. While you should take a light with you, turning it on ruins the mood and visibility. Taking risks is one of the spices of life.

Having a BIGGER boat cut your kayak in half - and - seriously injuring and/or killing its occupants.

THAT - well - yeah - it'd be a buzz kill for sure and would ruin the mood.

THINK Geezer - C'MON!!!!!!

[wildwoodfam]

do they KNOW that for sure? It would suggest that they have the powerboat(er) in question. I am quite sure the kayaker wasn't counting feet as they sliced his kayak!

I am amazed that nobody was injured!

Harkens back to mey earlier post - PAY ATTENTION!!!!

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by wildwoodfam

Having a BIGGER boat cut your kayak in half - and - seriously injuring and/or killing its occupants.

THAT - well - yeah - it'd be a buzz kill for sure and would ruin the mood.

THINK Geezer - C'MON!!!!!!

You probably don't want to be out where boats are zipping by without having the proper illumination available. Staying in protected coves or within 150 from shore should keep you fairly safe with enough time to reach shore if you see Captain Bonehead or the MP coming. Yes, it is an infraction, but then so is going 75 on route 93.

[wildwoodfam]

and I promise I won't go 75 on 93! At least when we are goin in the southbound direction (that's headed for home) -

[codeman671]

I have heard a rumor that the kayaker was naked??? Anyone else hear this? I was told that it was mentioned on WOKQ this morning.

You have got to be kidding me...A naked white butt, although it may be visible up to two miles away is no replacement for a white navigation light.

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

I am sure that the operator was TERRIFIED to see a kayak in front of him with no lights

A wayward swim raft would also have no lights.

Except for the length of his 27' boat, there's a lot we don't know about this operator. How fast would a big powerboat need to be travelling to chop through only one end of a kayak? Was he impaired? Did he leave because he was impaired? Was he navigating by GPS? That night had calm water, low traffic, a full moon and very clear visibility.

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

A wayward swim raft would also have no lights.

Except for the length of his 27' boat, there's a lot we don't know about this operator. How fast would a big powerboat need to be travelling to chop through only one end of a kayak? Was he impaired? Did he leave because he was impaired? Was he navigating by GPS? That night had calm water, low traffic, a full moon and very clear visibility.

The wayward swim raft normally wouldn't be occupied, would be close to shore and wouldn't be required by law to display proper lighting.

Regardless if the water was calm, traffic low, a full moon and clear visibility, the fact remains that a vessel was operating during the hours of darkness, between sunset and sunrise, without displaying proper lighting. The operator was at extreme risk of being killed.

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by NightWing

The wayward swim raft normally wouldn't be occupied, would be close to shore and wouldn't be required by law to display proper lighting.

Regardless if the water was calm, traffic low, a full moon and clear visibility, the fact remains that a vessel was operating during the hours of darkness, between sunset and sunrise, without displaying proper lighting. The operator was at extreme risk of being killed.

The captain is required to maintain a proper watch regardless. He also may not display lighting that interferes with his capacity for night operations and keeping a proper watch.

While one or both kayaks violated visibility regulations, the captain is responsible that a proper watch is kept and responsible for the safety of his passengers and crew. Unlighted kayak, raft, island, shoal or cruiser, conditions that night were ideal for the captain to avoid a collision. A captain cannot pick and choose what he may collide with.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

A wayward swim raft would also have no lights.

Except for the length of his 27' boat, there's a lot we don't know about this operator. How fast would a big powerboat need to be travelling to chop through only one end of a kayak? Was he impaired? Did he leave because he was impaired? Was he navigating by GPS? That night had calm water, low traffic, a full moon and very clear visibility.

I was curious as to how the boater was found. They mentioned the size of the boat, so I did some digging, and as I suspected, the media is not telling the whole truth. As I understand it, there was no hit and run, in fact the boater assisted the kayaker, and brought them to shore, leaving with them their complete info. As the damage to the kayak was well under the needed amount to create a reason for MP to get involved, they were notified after the fact. So basically in a nutshell, reckless Kayaker, scared boater, did the right thing, glad no one was hurt, end of story.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

"...I was curious as to how the boater was found. They mentioned the size of the boat, so I did some digging, and as I suspected, the media is not telling the whole truth..."

'Curious as to how "length of boat" returns "the whole truth"....

"The whole truth" is a winnowing process—especially if you were to start at post #1 here.

1) The kayak was cut in half—but only a portion of the bow is gone.
2) Two were rescued—but the kayak shown on TV was a single-seater.
3) It was a hit-and-run—but the boat came to their rescue.



That "digging"—was it a different boating forum? (e.g., BoatUS, Donzi-Registry, KayakSport?)

[ITD]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

I was curious as to how the boater was found. They mentioned the size of the boat, so I did some digging, and as I suspected, the media is not telling the whole truth. As I understand it, there was no hit and run, in fact the boater assisted the kayaker, and brought them to shore, leaving with them their complete info. As the damage to the kayak was well under the needed amount to create a reason for MP to get involved, they were notified after the fact. So basically in a nutshell, reckless Kayaker, scared boater, did the right thing, glad no one was hurt, end of story.

Hmmm, different story than what I got, just wondering who you got it from? Certainly is better than a hit and run.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

I was curious as to how the boater was found. They mentioned the size of the boat, so I did some digging, and as I suspected, the media is not telling the whole truth. As I understand it, there was no hit and run, in fact the boater assisted the kayaker, and brought them to shore, leaving with them their complete info. As the damage to the kayak was well under the needed amount to create a reason for MP to get involved, they were notified after the fact. So basically in a nutshell, reckless Kayaker, scared boater, did the right thing, glad no one was hurt, end of story.

Please post where your information came from. From what I saw yesterday it seems like the media was leaving it rather gray, giving the misconception that it was just another reckless boating accident on a dangerous lake.

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by dan

One went by our house about 10:30. No lights. Bright moon allowed us to see it going by. They are out there.

You can't see kayaks lighted by the moon.

[Islander]

First we are told that a speed limit is useless because it will not change a thing, only education and enforcement will fix the problem.

Then we are told that a speed limit will ruin the economy of the lakes region because all the high speed lovers will leave the area.

Those two arguments are mutually exclusive, which is the truth?

And please factor in all the kayak and canoe enthusiasts that will be coming to the area after the speed limit takes effect. Local merchants should stock up on brie and wine.

At the public hearings there were several local merchants that said the situation on the lake was scaring away customers.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

You can't see kayaks lighted by the moon.

That's a pretty broad statement. Wouldn't that depend on the color of the kayak. Lighter ones should be very visible.fficeffice" />>>
>>
First of all I don't kayak at night. And the kayaker was certainly wrong not to have the required lighting - but that's the only law that he was breaking (based on what we know).>>
>>
But the power boat operator is also at fault, and must have to be going fast enough that kayaker wasn't able to get out of the way, and also had to be going fast enough to cut a kayak in half. Most kayaks are pretty durable, but we were not even told what type of kayak it was (plastic, fiberglass, Kevlar, wood?) or how long it was. >>
>>
I'm amazed at the lack of information that has been released on this accident (like practically nothing officially).

And it is pretty thin argument to claim that a NH lake speed limit whould have a negitive effect on tourism - I personally believe that it would have a very positive effect - especially sice the opponents claim that only a very small percentage of boats are currently going over 45mph (plus this bill is for a state wide lake speed limit - not just for one on Winni).

[ApS]

Originally Posted by ITD

"...just telling what the guy at Shep's told me, I didn't see it, I wasn't there, hence the supposedly, we'll see, if it did happen some crack reporter will eventually find the story...".

I don't think so. The last time a kayaker was reported struck on this lake, it rated only a brief blurb on a Boston radio station.

If the kayak is valued at less than $2000, and no injuries resulted, a report to the Marine Patrol isn't required either.

Originally Posted by dan

One went by our house about 10:30. No lights. Bright moon allowed us to see it going by. They are out there.

Not just bright, the moon would have been directly overhead at that hour and would have been a full moon.

With or without a handheld lamp, there should have been enough danger heard and sighted to have enabled a kayaker to paddle out of harm's way: been there, done that.

[idigtractors]

Originally Posted by B R

do you really think they had a legal stern light? i think it's at least safe to say they didn't have "legal" lights. red/green and stern light 3' (?) above the largest occupants head? probably not.

This is a question and no I do not know the answer being the reason for asking. Do small craft such as a row boat, kayak need lights or can the operator just us a flash lite? I have on many occasions gone fishing with a row boat and a electric motor and used just the small lite on the motor as my lites. That is not saying I was in the right, that is the reason for the question. And before you ask, no you did not need to register the boat with an electric motor at the time. That tells ya how long ago it was.

[NightWing]

A canoe, kayak or rowboat (no motor) would only need to display a white light, visible 360° around the horizon for a distance of two miles.

[SAMIAM]

I agree with Steve that the story is a little fishy.Things get exaggerated when the story gets retold.I'd want a first hand account before I would buy into a boat being cut in half while no one was injured.
Unless,of course it was a 1000HP Baja doing 90 mph.....we'd all believe that for sure.

[ITD]

Ah vindicated, I didn't think the Shep's guy was BSing. Apologies accepted

[Silver Duck]

The 1:30 AM timing is not surprising; I've seen boats going in and out of the town docks at all hours of the night and in all kinds of weather (even thunder storms ).

Actually, I can't wait for the MP to start enforcing the 25 mph night time limit on Wednesday. From what I've seen over the years, it should be easy pickings for them.

As for the bonehead in the kayak, I'm glad he wasn't injured, but I hope the MP wrote him a jumbo ticket for his idiocy.

Silver Duck

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

Actually, I can't wait for the MP to start enforcing the 25 mph night time limit on Wednesday. From what I've seen over the years, it should be easy pickings for them.

They will only be enforcing that 25 mph at night in the specified zones. Also there is a lot of people that are misinformed telling boaters that there is in fact already a speed limit. Which is not true at all. I have heard from two different individuals that were at establishments in Meredith and Wolfeboro.

[Fish]

[QUOTE=Silver Duck]
Actually, I can't wait for the MP to start enforcing the 25 mph night time limit on Wednesday. From what I've seen over the years, it should be easy pickings for them.

According to the Citizen the PILOT program will not be starting until later in August.

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...226/-1/CITIZEN

[SteveA]

Originally Posted by ITD

Ah vindicated, I didn't think the Shep's guy was BSing. Apologies accepted

I will never question you again!

[SAMIAM]

You are vindicated......saw it on channel 9 this a.m......sorry I doubted you.

[Old Hubbard Rd]

MEREDITH, N.H. -- A kayaker from Vermont had a terrifying close call when a boat sliced his kayak in two on New Hampshire's Lake Winnipesaukee this weekend.

The Marine Patrol said Stephen Spitzer, 46, of Brattleboro, was kayaking around 1 a.m. Saturday when a 27-foot powerboat ran over him, cutting the front part of the kayak off.


Spitzer's kayak had no lights. No one was hurt.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

I am sure that the operator was TERRIFIED to see a kayak in front of him with no lights... I guess I just have a problem that the powerboater seems to be written up as the bad guy. We can all agree that all boaters have to keep a proper lookout, but a kayak out admittedly at night with no light! Again I think the article shouldn't have the slant that the boater is to blame. Shame on the kayak operator, and thank goodness no one was hurt. Why can't the article read A boater on lake winni had a terrifying close call when he struck a kayak at 1 am???? The kayaker was operating illegally with no lights, thankfully no one was injured.

[Excalibur]

I have to admit, I have been out on moonlit nights in the canoe with the lights off. I know I am taking a risk and sometimes do bonehead things every so often. But I try to hide in the shallows within 25 ft of shore and behind some large boulders for protection. There are a lot of nice portable lights out there for small craft and with the new LEDs they are very bright and use low power.

I have one that has both red and green led lights and a white stobe. Even though its made in China, its a great thing to have on board, even as a backup.

http://store.seattlesportsco.com/pro...&idproduct=139

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

I have to admit, I have been out on moonlit nights in the canoe with the lights off. I know I am taking a risk and sometimes do bonehead things every so often. But I try to hide in the shallows within 25 ft of shore and behind some large boulders for protection. There are a lot of nice portable lights out there for small craft and with the new LEDs they are very bright and use low power.

I have one that has both red and green led lights and a white stobe. Even though its made in China, its a great thing to have on board, even as a backup.

http://store.seattlesportsco.com/pro...&idproduct=139

The law requires "proper" lighting for the type of vessel it is displayed on. Neither red/green nor a strobe light are proper lighting for your boat.

[pmj]

NightWing said:

The law requires "proper" lighting for the type of vessel it is displayed on. Neither red/green nor a strobe light are proper lighting for your boat.

Nightwing: Are you saying that portable lights are not legal?? If I have a dead battery and I use portable r/g light afixed to my bow and a white portable afixed to my stern then I am not legal? Why wouldn't these be proper? I wasn't aware of this.

[Irrigation Guy]

Originally Posted by pmj

NightWing said:

Nightwing: Are you saying that portable lights are not legal?? If I have a dead battery and I use portable r/g light afixed to my bow and a white portable afixed to my stern then I am not legal? Why wouldn't these be proper? I wasn't aware of this.

I beleive nightwing was referring to a canoe or kayak in the quote. The red/green on the bow and all around white above the red/green are appropriate for a power driven boat and sailboat under auxilliary power.

[Mink Islander]

Originally Posted by LocalRealtor

I beleive nightwing was referring to a canoe or kayak in the quote. The red/green on the bow and all around white above the red/green are appropriate for a power driven boat and sailboat under auxilliary power.

I think you're confusing what is appropriate with the "minimum required by law"

Per the Boat-ed website for NH:

If less than 23.0 feet (7 meters) long, these vessels should:

If practical, exhibit the same lights as required for unpowered vessels less than 65.6 feet in length. (Mink Islander: meaning have the typical required lighting of bow lights and white stern light that you see on a sailboat)
If not practical, have on hand at least one lantern or flashlight shining a white light as shown in Figure 3.

Of course the rules may be different if you're butt naked in your vessel -- or perhaps should be. Maybe a "flashing" white light would be appropriate after all.....

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by pmj

NightWing said:

Nightwing: Are you saying that portable lights are not legal?? If I have a dead battery and I use portable r/g light afixed to my bow and a white portable afixed to my stern then I am not legal? Why wouldn't these be proper? I wasn't aware of this.

I didn't say that portable lights are not legal. I said that the light unit described did not represent proper lighting for his canoe.

A canoe need display a white light that is visible for 360° around the horizon for 2 miles. That is the requirement for a manually powered vessel. Red and green are navigation lights for a power boat. In no case is a white strobe light considered proper lighting.

As a point of interest, those short, suction cup mounted white lights are not adequate because they do not show above the operator and therefore are not visible for 360° around the horizon. If you must use one, mount it on a pole and keep fresh batteries on hand.

The act of gliding along in the dark with your fanny at water level in an unlit boat is absolutely insane. If you want to stargaze in the dark, do it from shore. If you want peace and tranquility in dark water, run a bath and soak by candlelight. The chances of getting run over by a 300 horsepower meat cleaver on shore or in your tub are very small indeed.

I almost hit a canoe operated by a husband and wife several years ago. The canoe was dark green to blend in with everything. They were wearing dark clothing and were crossing a river, perpendicular to shore. Pitch dark, no moon, nothing to indicate they were there. They didn't even call out as a warning, just kept paddling along to cross right in front of me.

When I finally saw them, they were probably 5 feet in front of me. I slammed into reverse so fast I took half the river over the transom. They looked at me and continued to paddle to shore.

I won't go into great detail about what happened after, but I gave them a verbal Boating Ed lesson that they probably heard in the next county.

They didn't even have the decency to offer bathroom tissue so I could clean up..................................

Don't drive a boat at night without proper lights.....................please.

[Mink Islander]

You raise a great point about the height of stern lights. I replaced the one on my old whaler Montauk two years ago because the one it came with (used), was only a couple feet higher than the gunwales and just higher than the top of the center console. Legal, but barely, I suspect. Problem is that my boat has a dodger that when raised, was nearly as high as the center console and I was concerned that my stern light was not visible from the front in all situations. So I replaced it with a 4 ft one.

I saw a small boat this weekend whose stern light was not visible when approaching it head on. Made me think I made a good decision....

[Coastal Laker]

I don't know if any of you feel the same way we do... my husband and I have both noticed an increased number of boats operating at night with either no bow lights or no stern light. It's beginning to get scary.

On Friday night, we drove from Meredith to the Weirs to watch the fireworks. A boat passed us that had no all-around light. As soon as we couldn't see the green light anymore, the boat vanished. With the lights ahead at the Weirs, my husband did all he could to keep track of where that boat went as he could barely make out the reflection of the boat's wake. He kept his eye on the boat's wake while I kept an eye out for the rest of the boat traffic.

Then on Sat night we went out for dinner on the lake and saw a jet boat doing donuts 30 ft from the docks and it had no stern light either. Fed up, we called the MPs and they did indeed come and stop the offending boat. They were caught some distance out from shore and were escorted back in. No sympathy here for the MPs ruining their evening. They could have ruined plenty more.

If a boat is out on the lake and loses it's lights, has no spare bulbs, or otherwise can't get them working, someone should shine a light on the boat so it can be seen with either a good flashlight or spot light... and NOT drive down the middle of the bay full sprint around other boats. UGH!

If they people in the kayak were truly without lights, they are lucky to be alive.

[Weirs guy]

Stephen Spitzer to earn a Darwin Awards Honorable Mention? I'm not trying to pick on the guy, but my 9 year old knows better then to be out after dark in a kayak with no lights.

[Aquadeziac]

On the 11pm news last nite there was a pic of the offending kayak. It wasn't cut in half actually,more like a couple feet lopped off one end. The passenger compartment looked intact. It looked in the pic like it was just a one passenger kayak.

[Lin]

Originally Posted by idigtractors

This is a question and no I do not know the answer being the reason for asking. Do small craft such as a row boat, kayak need lights or can the operator just us a flash lite? I have on many occasions gone fishing with a row boat and a electric motor and used just the small lite on the motor as my lites. That is not saying I was in the right, that is the reason for the question. And before you ask, no you did not need to register the boat with an electric motor at the time. That tells ya how long ago it was.

We have two canoes and four kayaks and we all have the stern and bow lights. They have the extention for 3'. Have had them for years, usually we don't use them as we are back in shore on time. However, if we have gone on an extended paddle, we toss them in, just in case we get back after dusk. I think in about ten years we've only had to use them maybe 3x. I agree kayaks are low in the water and sometimes hard to see but we love them. We usually stay pretty close within the 150' rule of land,(just so we don't conflict with power boats we choose to follow the shoreline mostly over rocks and shallower water) however we oftentimes have to cross over a bay and attempt to do it at it's narrowest point and usually pick a time when there aren't a parade of boats traveling through. I'm not going to blame everyone out there but I have to say, that even being within the 150' or a no wake zone with the canoe or kayak, we've had some scary moments with fast boats and large wakes ignoring the rules.

[Sue15]

We had picked up a friends daughter who was working in Meredith Harbor at 11PM and then visited a friend who had just purchased a new camp on Bear Island. On the way back to Meredith we hit the kayak because they didn't have any lights on. It was the scariest nite of our lives! We will be forever grateful they were ok. We stopped and they were insistent that they didn't want a ride back to their camp-come to find out they didn't even know where it was. They did not have life perservers on. It took us at least 15 minutes by boat to get to their dock and they were at least a half mile off shore. The front third of his kyack was severed-we retrieved it put both their kayaks in our boat and made sure they were alright and home safely. We would like to urge everyone to please observe boating safety rules, wear life persevers, use lights starting at dusk and maybe stay near the shore in non motored craft at night. Many of us have not slept since this incident early Saturday morning. The Marine Patrol gentlemen were wonderful and understanding but it will never take the awful memories away of what might have happened. Sue

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Sue15

We had picked up a friends daughter who was working in Meredith Harbor at 11PM and then visited a friend who had just purchased a new camp on Bear Island. On the way back to Meredith we hit the kayak because they didn't have any lights on. It was the scariest nite of our lives! We will be forever grateful they were ok. We stopped and they were insistent that they didn't want a ride back to their camp-come to find out they didn't even know where it was. They did not have life perservers on. It took us at least 15 minutes by boat to get to their dock and they were at least a half mile off shore. The front third of his kyack was severed-we retrieved it put both their kayaks in our boat and made sure they were alright and home safely. We would like to urge everyone to please observe boating safety rules, wear life persevers, use lights starting at dusk and maybe stay near the shore in non motored craft at night. Many of us have not slept since this incident early Saturday morning. The Marine Patrol gentlemen were wonderful and understanding but it will never take the awful memories away of what might have happened. Sue

Thanks for sharing, that must have been horrifying. I can't even imagine...

[hazelnut]

MY GOD!

Not only did they take their lives for granted that night, they almost destroyed your lives. I couldn't imagine the awful feeling I would have if I had taken someone's life even if it wasn't my fault.

Thanks for sharing the story and I am glad everyone was ok.

[SAMIAM]

Good for you for doing all the right things to help out the kayakers.That must have been some scary!
By the way.....was there any damage to your boat?

[Sue15]

No, thankfully there was no damage to the motor boat we were on. There were young adults who were quite traumetized and none of us adults slept that nite. whew am I glad no one was hurt. Thanks for all the kind remarks that we did the right thing-it's hard to think straight in a situation like that but we couldn't leave them in the middle of the lake!!

[ITD]

Sue, good for you, God was with those people that night, you should rest easy, you obviously did all you could and did the right thing.

[Kamper]

SUE15, Thank you for filling us in on the whole story.

[SteveA]

Originally Posted by ITD

Sue, good for you, God was with those people that night, you should rest easy, you obviously did all you could and did the right thing.

I agree with ITD... you went above and beyond... and did all you could. Be proud of that.. some people in that type of situation would not have done all that you did.

[Winnipesaukee]

I haven't read past post 6 or so, but I'll say one thing: I smell alcohol.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Winnipesaukee

I haven't read past post 6 or so, but I'll say one thing: I smell alcohol.

You should probably read past post 6.

[Sman]

Knowing the law is a must and probably would have helped the person in the kayak, but don't you guys depend on your own commonsense to keep yourself safe? I follow the laws but don't rely on them to keep me safe. If the law says a single white light, think about it if you have boated at night, a single white light not moving very fast or at all tends to blend in with shore lights and even if legal, in my opinion, it is not enough, and I realize this kayak had no light.

Using a less reasonable example to make a point...if a car is speeding over a cross walk and as a pedestrian you are in the right, do you step out in front of the car anyway. You may be technically or legally right but you will also be technically and legally dead. I am glad these folks jumped in time.

I feel for the people in the boat that hit them, glad everyone is ok

[NH_boater]

They call that being "Dead Right".

[Kamper]

Originally Posted by Sman

Knowing the law is a must and probably would have helped the person in the kayak, but don't you guys depend on your own commonsense to keep yourself safe? ... glad everyone is ok

All my common sense isnt gong to save you if I cant see you at night. Having appropriate lights would have increased the lead time that could have allowed all the involved operators to avoid a dangerous situation.

I try to be heads-up but no one is 100% all the time. Running a boat involves a bit of multi-tasking. If the moon would have let me see a hazard at the last second but I'm looking down at my chart-plotter at that instant, there's going to be an accident.

Highway planners use the term "conflicts" for situations like that. Where you need to be aware of more than one thing at a time and are trying to priotise. Roads are supposed to be designed so that a driver is not surpised by the conflicts built into the highways system. Nothing can protect you from the conflicts that arise from another person's actions. You just have to hope you recognise them in time to deal with them appropriatly.