What Speed Limit ????????

[Pineedles]

Wow, I bring up the idea of a meeting again and OCD politely replies, and EL decides he'll have none of that. That just shows how committed he is to a compromise I guess. BTW, the boring part of this thread is El's multiquotes. I think the SL opposers really are trying to work out a solution IMHO.

Originally Posted by Airwaves

I was surfing the net looking for the average boat registration payment to NH when I stumbled across a study completed in June 2003.It addresses the economic impact of NH's surface water uses and breaks it down into various subsections ie: Boating, Fishing, Swimming etc.We've been down the road of statistics vs emotion before. Now let's through money into the equation and then ask, does New Hampshire want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg?

Funny you should bring this up. The lead partner at this firm, the guy most involved with this project, was one of the biggest and most vocal supporters of a permanent 45/25 speed limit. He spoke at several events and hearings about the negative impact that high speed boating was having on our "golden egg". He talked about how hard the state has worked for so long to market our lakes and mountains and to project a "natural" image for NH to attract tourists. He worried aloud about the destruction to that image that such a contrary, aggressive, and "unnatural" activity was having and how much of a negative economic impact it was having. Why do you think we don't have photos of 6-ton cigarette boats blasting across the water on the font of our tourist brochures? The very experts you are quoting are some of your most avid opponents on this issue.
Now, please tell us what you found about the registration payments and how, assuming they have increased, that is the fault of a SL that the state has not yet invested $10K into.

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I will ask any SL supporter that feels someone who breaks the 45/25 is a criminal and scofflaw to please honestly tell me you obey every roadway SL. If you do not, do you consider yourself a criminal and scofflaw?

Scoff⋅law [skawf-law, skof-] –noun 1. A person who flouts the law. Fool [fool] - noun 1. A person who brags openly about being a scofflaw. I am neither a scofflaw nor a fool.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

How did you know that one/some of us are Law enforcement officers?????

I know you aren't, from your PM.

Originally Posted by onlywinni

Dont worry I plan on admitting in a public hearing my blatant disregard for the law.

Of course you will. I can read the headlines the next day ..."Law-breaking go-fast boater tells legislators what they can do with their speed limit - Permanent speed limit bill passes in historic landslide".

Originally Posted by onlywinni

I just hope you show up, because once you open your mouth my points will be confirmed.

I don't need to show up. My work is done. My points are already confirmed.

Originally Posted by Pineedles

That just shows how committed he is to a compromise I guess. I think the SL opposers really are trying to work out a solution IMHO.

I am committed to a compromise and a solution; the compromise we worked out already, and the solution it proved to be. 45 is a pretty darn fast speed in a boat..fast enough for any reasonable boating activity on a crowded lake. Yet is it slow enough to provide for mutual enjoyment of the lake by all...a perfect compromise... and it has proven to be the perfect solution to the problems that so many complained about before last summer.

Originally Posted by Chimi

I will be filming all weekend, and will be sending the film to every state rep and senator. The film will be enlightening to these reps and senators that have never been on a boat, let alone spent the weekend on Winnipesaukee. The documentary will clearly show that the problem is not excessive speed GFBL boats, but rather will provide proof that there are far more serious problems, that jeopardize safety on the water. If these people are going to vote on something, they should vote on facts, not fiction created by a core group of people with an agenda. I'm going to document what really goes on out there and how dangerous these conditions are. If a GFBL boat passes too fast or too close, he'll get filmed too. It's time that the truth be told, and video does not lie.

PLEASE tell us when we are going to see this documentary. The suspense is killing me.

Here's a guy "tossed out of his speedboat". No, he wasn't going too fast Maybe he was drunk;
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/cent...3Q0SNA0HNQ2BM1

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

Wow, I bring up the idea of a meeting again and OCD politely replies, and EL decides he'll have none of that. That just shows how committed he is to a compromise I guess. BTW, the boring part of this thread is El's multiquotes. I think the SL opposers really are trying to work out a solution IMHO.

Agreed Pin... I also see he conveniently decided not to respond to my query about adhering to roadway SLs. I know the answer already.

Thank you for the support on having dialogue between SL supporters and opponents. While there have been many compromises offered up by some supporters and some compromises offered by some supporters, there are still some supporters that are covering their ears while screaming out loud.

Hopefully, the legislature will rely on the testimony of the experts on this subject- the NHMP.

Oh well, another day in Paradise- though I think the boat will come out of the water today.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by elchase

Now "you're" grammar better never stray or you get what you deserve.

Good luck with that.

Originally Posted by elchase

Maybe in some cases. But in most cases they were just routinely assigned according to the highway type. If what you say was the case, then it would be a HUGE coincidence that almost all interstates have the same two or three limits (55, 65, and 70), and almost all parkways have the same 45MPH limit. If what you say was the case, one highway would have a 54MPH limit, another would have a 63MPH limit, and another might have an 88MPH limit...each based on those years and years of facts and studies that determined just what the exact right speed limit was right for each stretch of each highway. Do you really think that they did studies on all of NH's highways and determined that almost all of them deserved the exact same 65MPH speed limits for almost all portions of each? The 65 limit on 93 was assigned with the same degree of specificity that 45/25 was chosen in HB-847...65 is the speed that "works" on almost all highways and 45/25 is the speed that "works" on hundreds and hundreds of lakes around the country. It lets the other boaters feel safe while allowing for any appropriate activity. It is a pretty fast speed in a boat, yet slow enough to allow for mutual enjoyment of the lake by all boaters. It is a good COMPROMISE.

This makes absolutely no sense, but if this logic were to prevail, wouldn't certain parts of the lake be subject to a higher speed limit than the more 'thickly settled' neighborhoods?

Originally Posted by elchase

Just because you cite your own earlier post does not make it so. Original speed limits were most certainly established for safety purposes. The temporary reduction to the nation-wide 55 max limit in the 70's was a fuel conservation measure.

Read it for yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law

Originally Posted by elchase

Common sense and all those thousands of people attending hearings and writing letters was all the "facts" that were needed to see beyond a shadow of a doubt that speeding was a problem. Speeding is not a problem on Winnipesaukee anymore. Let's keep it this way.

We obviously come to an impasse when it comes to the definition of a fact. I tend to use the commonly accepted version, which excludes things such as feelings, perceptions, opinions and the like.

The law is not working. How do I know it is not working, this past summer there were still boats violating no wake zones, violating the 150' rule regularly, failing to maintain a proper lookout, BUI, boating without a certificate and finally speeding, day and night. The list goes on and on.

It is a solution to a non existant problem. How do I know it was not a problem, because there was a study that showed that during a six month period, 0.075% of the boats were able to achieve a speed greater than 60MPH. There were also ZERO 'high speed' accidents before the SL and ZERO 'high speed' accidents after. While some argue this is the result of the speed limit, I will continue to contend that speed is, and was never an issue.

For the record, I do not own a GFBL.

I'll repost this for you to read again. How can you argue with the Director of the Division of Safety Services? He appears to have some credibility and knowledge of the issue, no?

GILFORD, NH – New Hampshire has the lowest rate of recreational boating fatalities in New England, according to US Coast Guard statistics, and is among seven states that have the lowest rates in the country. ...David T. Barrett, Director of the Division of Safety Services, said the low fatality rates reflect a combination of factors, such as mandatory boater education, aggressive patrol and a cooperative spirit and partnership between the marine trades and water-related tourist businesses.

[Kracken]

I would like to commend OCD for his offer to set up a meeting. I for one would be willing to attend. I would hope APS, BI, TB and Sunset would attend as well. As for Mr. Chase, In spite of the fact you have insulted every person that disagrees with your point of view, I would like to meet you in person. I would hope that you really don’t believe your personal safety would be at risk but I can assure you the “cowboys and scofflaws” wish you no harm. I would expect a meeting to be cordial and it would be difficult to figure out who had the opposing views.

I have met some of the speed limit opponents and I can tell you they are good people. I would be astonished to find out that even one member that supports the limits are not as well.

Come on...If Nixon can go to China.....

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by elchase

Of course you will. I can read the headlines the next day ..."Law-breaking go-fast boater tells legislators what they can do with their speed limit - Permanent speed limit bill passes in historic landslide".

You are probably correct-we finally agree

I will just send my Father in Law. He has captained a boat on Winni for the last 60+ years. He has never operated any boat in excess of probably 40mph.

When he hears the nonsense that comes from the speed limit supporters he is amused. He probably makes a much better witness than I

Thanks for the advice. You are good for something.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by elchase

Funny you should bring this up. The lead partner at this firm, the guy most involved with this project, was one of the biggest and most vocal supporters of a permanent 45/25 speed limit. He spoke at several events and hearings about the negative impact that high speed boating was having on our "golden egg".

This same guy is the guy that withheld evidence of Littlefield bar tabs. So that he can protect his liquor license. Never once have I consider him a law abiding citizen. You should go to some of the Planning board hearings. Some of the things he ask for zoning changes. And you say he wants to change the lake to 'Golden Pond'? His establishment is an eye sore if you ask me...............

The only Golden egg he wants to protect is his own.

[sunset on the dock]

Things are getting a little intense around here...here's something to lighten things up. That boating accident link from EL above...I was unable to open the article itself but did you see the "discussion" from readers contained in the link. It makes all of us seem downright wholesome and civilized. The grenades that they lob at one another make us look like a bunch of choir boys.Check it out if you didn't get a chance.

[jmen24]

Why did you choose Lake Winnipesaukee as your home, second home or place to bring your boat or yourself? And which decade in which YOU (not your family) started using it regularly? I am not talking about, went up with my parents, I am talking each one of us personnally.

As we all know there are many other lakes in this region and I am interested to know why some have choosen this lake and when.

I am personally in the market to purchase a boat that will be on Winni full time for the first time this year. We never took our smaller boat on the big lake as we always felt it was undersized for the lake. We primarily boated on Merrymeeting as it was much quiter and more relaxing and closer. The reason we will be choosing Winni for our new boat is access to amenities, dining and entertainment for the kids. The lake has not changed at all in the ten years since we used our old boat heavily to now. I have spent my younger years living 15 minutes south of the Lake and could not call any other area home as the mountains, seasons, towns and scenery keep me close.

Basically we all have our reasons for saying Lake Winni is the place for me, but I really get the feeling that some peoples enjoyment has changed since that decision to come here and if that is the case what was it or when and really what keeps YOU here. (I would like to keep this to each individual posters response, instead of picking apart everyones reasons)

If nobody wants to play, that is fine, I WILL TAKE MY BALL AND GO HOME!!

[DoTheMath]

Originally Posted by jmen24

Why did you choose Lake Winnipesaukee as your home, second home or place to bring your boat or yourself? And which decade in which YOU (not your family) started using it regularly? I am not talking about, went up with my parents, I am talking each one of us personnally.

As we all know there are many other lakes in this region and I am interested to know why some have choosen this lake and when.

I am personally in the market to purchase a boat that will be on Winni full time for the first time this year. We never took our smaller boat on the big lake as we always felt it was undersized for the lake. We primarily boated on Merrymeeting as it was much quiter and more relaxing and closer. The reason we will be choosing Winni for our new boat is access to amenities, dining and entertainment for the kids. The lake has not changed at all in the ten years since we used our old boat heavily to now. I have spent my younger years living 15 minutes south of the Lake and could not call any other area home as the mountains, seasons, towns and scenery keep me close.

Basically we all have our reasons for saying Lake Winni is the place for me, but I really get the feeling that some peoples enjoyment has changed since that decision to come here and if that is the case what was it or when and really what keeps YOU here. (I would like to keep this to each individual posters response, instead of picking apart everyones reasons)

If nobody wants to play, that is fine, I WILL TAKE MY BALL AND GO HOME!!

I have a really nice 2007 Cobalt 222 (now called the 232) with 10 hours, YES 10 hours on it for sale! Sitting on a custom trailer - PM for more deets!)


And I'm all for a meeting - enough of the "hide behind the keyboard /screen" BS. Man (or woman) UP and show yourself - it's easy to sit at your desk and type, but who's really interested in being heard AND seen!? Name the time and place and I'm there (if I'm not traveling for personal / biz.) and I will be the first person to shake EVERYONE'S hand, offer a warm greeting and an offer for a genuine debate on the SL. It's the off season up the lake, so there should be plenty of places (restaurants, etc...) to accommodate as many of us that want to meet up and chat.

[OCDACTIVE]

for meeting I am thinking the weekend of January 9th at the lake.

This way we will be beyond the holidays.

Would this work for everyone?

Maybe over in Meredith?

[OCDACTIVE]

Or the 2nd if everyone is going to be up there after new years???

[BroadHopper]

I choose to stay at the lake. My family had a place on the lake since 1892. When the Claremeont education BS flared up, our taxes have quadrupled. My family had to sell a great fishing lodge that looks like the lodge on the movie 'On Golden Pond'. It is a shame as a 'fat cat' bought the property, tore down the lodge and built a McMansion.
Now I have 'laketop' property. The family is already 'railroaded' out of our lakefront property, I be be d@%n if I am 'railroaded' out of my laketop property. All because of a bunch of non NH natives that thinks they can 'railroad' their way into NH.

That is why I am putting up a fight. My family suffered enough! 'Live Free or Die trying!'

As for a meeting after the New Years. I usually leave for Breckenridge. The annual ULLR festival is on the second week of January. For those who have not seen this, add it to you 'bucket list'. You won't be disappointed!

I usually stay for about a month or more. Depending on the snow conditions and how the rental is going. I have a 4500 sq ft ski lodge for rent with 4 bed rooms, 1 bunk room, and 4 bath rooms. I usually rent the lodge out to a family. Due to the economy, I have been running it as a rooming house last year. A lot of work.

The lake is my 'home' and I intend to live there for the rest of my life. I will fight the laws that take me off the lake because I am poor and the fat cats can take over.

[LIforrelaxin]

Unfortunately for me the first two weekends in January are very busy. My girl friend gets her Children Back from their Dad the first one, and the Second one is her Son's Birthday.
In short I wouldn't be able to do either of those weekends.

[gtagrip]

Right now, any weekend in January works for me.

[OCDACTIVE]

I believe that the weekend of the 16th is a long weekend. I assume a lot of people have plans... I am off to Virginia at the end of Jan. Have to visit the boat.. She gets lonely.. but seriously there is a kickoff party for next years poker run so I will be heading down to that... Then off on a cruise and the Miami International Boat Show in Feb.

I know we will not be able to accomodate everyone but the 2nd or 9th seems to be the best. Let me know between the two....

[BroadHopper]

So that will work for me. I believe the Winnilakers are having their annual winter get together on the 9th and 10th. OCDACTIVE should go. They are over 200 members and counting. All against the speed limits. They remain to be anonymous like the bass federation. But when there is legislation going on. Watch out!

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

So that will work for me. I believe the Winnilakers are having their annual winter get together on the 9th and 10th. OCDACTIVE should go. They are over 200 members and counting. All against the speed limits. They remain to be anonymous like the bass federation. But when there is legislation going on. Watch out!

OOOh sounds like fun!!! Sign me up.. LOL..

BroadHopper Congrats on your 1000 post!

[BroadHopper]

Right now about 50 Winnilakers are in Key West for the Offshore World Championship. I usually go but lack the funds this year. It is quite the sight when we wear our Winnilakers T at the Miami airport. They rent a B&B as headquarter off Duval St. In the past, we use to sneak 'Winnilakers' bumper stickers on to the race boats. Surprisingly the owners keep them on till the end of the race. Someone has to let people know our pride of the lake!

Back in 2005? at a poker run on Lake Havasu, the local Fountain dealer displayed a huge Winnilakers logo on his Poker Run Special. That was the highlight of the poker run. My neighbor in Breckenridge, who was there, still talk about it!

"If it's fun we're there!"

[VtSteve]

Sounds like a fun group BH. Quite a large group from Winni down there. I had done some tentative planning to be in KW this week, but it didn't work out. I'm also trying to see if I can finally make the Miami Boat Show, although the Ft. Lauderdale show is a bit easier for me to get to.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Right now about 50 Winnilakers are in Key West for the Offshore World Championship. I usually go but lack the funds this year. It is quite the sight when we wear our Winnilakers T at the Miami airport. They rent a B&B as headquarter off Duval St. In the past, we use to sneak 'Winnilakers' bumper stickers on to the race boats. Surprisingly the owners keep them on till the end of the race. Someone has to let people know our pride of the lake!

Back in 2005? at a poker run on Lake Havasu, the local Fountain dealer displayed a huge Winnilakers logo on his Poker Run Special. That was the highlight of the poker run. My neighbor in Breckenridge, who was there, still talk about it!

"If it's fun we're there!"

Very nice.. The Active Thunder Cult is there as well.

OK... After talking with a few people... I realize this wont work for everyone but it seems to be the best for the majority.


January 2nd.... Speed limit group meet up.. (not sure where, maybe mill falls market place and hit that italian resturant / bar (forget name right now))

This is open to everyone.. Oppossors, Supporters just to get to know each other. we don't have to debate but things may be a lot more civil in here if we can put the face with the name. Maybe Don may even like to join us.

Let me know if you plan on coming.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Let me know if you plan on coming.

I would really love to join all of the anti-SL crowd (let's be honest, Mr. Chase is not coming) but I will be welcoming a future member of the anti-SL crowd on or about Jan 1! I will try and send a representative in my place.

Even better, maybe this meeting could take place in Concord during one of the upcoming debates on the sunset provision. We're going to need more support against the lies and spin of the pro SL crowd in Concord rather than at Giuseppe's....

[VtSteve]

I think the best way to treat a situation like this Ryan is with an open mind. We've all had our issues on this forum at one time or another. After the holidays is a great time to meet people. I think you'll find that in general, face to face contact mends quite a bit. I don't know about you,

I don't think anyone intended this to be a Pro This or Anti That type of meeting. In fact, it would probably be great if the subject never came up. Opposing attorneys and other such factions meet all the time outside work. It soothes the spirits, mends the soul.

As for Ed? OK, so we differ in our methods and opinions on some things. But he's obvious a smart and articulate guy, so why not get together with him and others and see how things go? I haven't been in any business yet that permits me to work with only those I choose, or only those that agree with me. That's life, pure and simple. This is precisely why I wanted a safety, or just a boating thread to thrive. You'll never get a group of people to agree on everything, so why not start with discussions on things most do agree with?

January 2nd is a pretty tough time for me to truck over, that's my weekend with the kids. But January 2nd doesn't have to be the last meeting ever does it? Perhaps some friends will be made, and everyone becomes on big happy, lake-loving family


Try it, you may like it.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I think the best way to treat a situation like this Ryan is with an open mind. We've all had our issues on this forum at one time or another. After the holidays is a great time to meet people. I think you'll find that in general, face to face contact mends quite a bit. I don't know about you,

I don't think anyone intended this to be a Pro This or Anti That type of meeting. In fact, it would probably be great if the subject never came up. Opposing attorneys and other such factions meet all the time outside work. It soothes the spirits, mends the soul.

As for Ed? OK, so we differ in our methods and opinions on some things. But he's obvious a smart and articulate guy, so why not get together with him and others and see how things go? I haven't been in any business yet that permits me to work with only those I choose, or only those that agree with me. That's life, pure and simple. This is precisely why I wanted a safety, or just a boating thread to thrive. You'll never get a group of people to agree on everything, so why not start with discussions on things most do agree with?

Try it, you may like it.

I agree 100%.

[BroadHopper]

Has this room off to the side. A family room atmosphere. That will be a great place to meet. There is no traffic in and out. So we can talk without being disturbed. The owners are not SL supporters.

[BroadHopper]

There are some saddles for the 'cowboys'.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

So that will work for me. I believe the Winnilakers are having their annual winter get together on the 9th and 10th. OCDACTIVE should go. They are over 200 members and counting. All against the speed limits. They remain to be anonymous like the bass federation. But when there is legislation going on. Watch out!

And I ran into one of the members at the Patriots Game on Sunday. He had a Pats Game Jersey and on the back instead of a player name it read "WINNILAKER" So we struck up a conversation.

I'm up for a meeting. Let me know I'm probably good for any of those dates discussed.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Has this room off to the side. A family room atmosphere. That will be a great place to meet. There is no traffic in and out. So we can talk without being disturbed. The owners are not SL supporters.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Even better, maybe this meeting could take place in Concord during one of the upcoming debates on the sunset provision. We're going to need more support against the lies and spin of the pro SL crowd in Concord rather than at Giuseppe's....

This doesn't sound like anyone is putting out the welcome mat to the opposing side to attend but maybe that's what you want? Hardly a good omen for enhancing communications between the 2 sides.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

This doesn't sound like anyone is putting out the welcome mat to the opposing side to attend but maybe that's what you want? Hardly a good omen for enhancing communications between the 2 sides.

Well let me be very clear.. Would love to have you join us Sunset. I look forward to meeting you.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

This doesn't sound like anyone is putting out the welcome mat to the opposing side to attend but maybe that's what you want? Hardly a good omen for enhancing communications between the 2 sides.

Agree. Lets pick a location not based on whether or not they support the limit or not. Lets also agree to make this a productive meeting. Not one of bickering and finger pointing. Sunset throw out a location I'm up for anything.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Agree. Lets pick a location not based on whether or not they support the limit or not. Lets also agree to make this a productive meeting. Not one of bickering and finger pointing. Sunset throw out a location I'm up for anything.

How about Giuseppe's??? if that doesn't work it isn't like we don't have a bunch of other places walking distance away? town docks, Largo, Church Landing etc etc...

[BroadHopper]

Or the Inn at Mill's Falls. Rusty is a staunch SL supporter. Winnfabs claims that Alec Ray is a supporter but he personally told me he has not sided with anyone! One of Winnfabs fibs.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Or the Inn at Mill's Falls. Rusty is a staunch SL supporter. Winnfabs claims that Alec Ray is a supporter but he personally told me he has not sided with anyone! One of Winnfabs fibs.

well maybe our patronage will help show him the right direction.

Originally Posted by VitaBene

he conveniently decided not to respond to my query about adhering to roadway SLs. I know the answer already.

It's in there.

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Hopefully, the legislature will rely on the testimony of the experts on this subject- the NHMP.

The NHMP is not an expert in telling us what the citizens wanted and how satisfied they are with what they got. Why not just ask the citizens? I'm guessing that there will be another poll by the time the bill is ready for a vote that will show how NH's citizens feel about the speed limit. And you guys can show them your self-poll where you asked yourselves what you thought.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Read it for yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law

Exactly as I said. The NMSL was put into place in '74 to address the '73 oil embargo. It reduced any exisiting speed limit that was above 55 to 55, to save fuel. Did you think that we did not have speed limits before that and that this was the start of speed limits in our country?

Originally Posted by onlywinni

I will just send my Father in Law.

That sounds wise. It would not have been good for your cause to have a guy show up and say "I'm a law-breaker and here's how I feel".

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

This same guy is the guy that withheld evidence of Littlefield bar tabs. So that he can protect his liquor license. Never once have I consider him a law abiding citizen. You should go to some of the Planning board hearings. Some of the things he ask for zoning changes. And you say he wants to change the lake to 'Golden Pond'? His establishment is an eye sore if you ask me............... The only Golden egg he wants to protect is his own.

We must be talking about a different thing. Who are you talking about?

Originally Posted by jmen24

We never took our smaller boat on the big lake as we always felt it was undersized for the lake. We primarily boated on Merrymeeting as it was much quiter and more relaxing and closer. ... I really get the feeling that some peoples enjoyment has changed since that decision to come here

Your boat would be just fine on Winnipesaukee now, except on the Broads during windy days. I have a small bowrider that has suddenly become plenty big enough. I know Merrymeeting well, and Winni is much like Merrymeeting now. And while many had lost their enjoyment of Winni in recent years, they are finding it to be a much better place now. I say this in all sincerity. I know you have been posting as an "anti", but if you give Winnipesaukee's new-found civility a chance, I'm sure you will come around quickly. You do not need a 30-ft boat to feel safe on Winni anymore.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

The family is already 'railroaded' out of our lakefront property,... All because of a bunch of non NH natives that thinks they can 'railroad' their way into NH.

We all own property that used to belong to someone else...and they had to sell it for one reason or another...and we had enough to buy it...and we can build whatever we want on it, within the law, once we own it. This is America. Maybe Obama can help you get it back from those "fat cats".

Originally Posted by Ryan

I would really love to join all of the anti-SL crowd (let's be honest, Mr. Chase is not coming)

I would love to come so long as it is not at one of those places that opposed the SL. Most of those places are so seedy that I have to burn my clothes afterward. Let's meet at one of the area's more respectable establishments, like Church Landing.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Not Church Landing! Rusty is a staunch SL supporter. Winnfabs claims that Alec Ray is a supporter but he personally told me he has not sided with anyone! One of Winnfabs fibs.

On second thought...

[Pineedles]

We are getting closer to a meeting.

I don't own a GFBL boat. My cousin who owns a boat that can go faster than 25 at night and 45 during the day supports some sort of a speed limit. I respect his opinion because he is on the lake more than I am, but in the end it is his opinion.

I don't like to see erosion of shore front properties. I haven't planted any grass on my shore, and underpowing boats create bigger waves that erode the natural shoreline.

I don't like the erosion of our Rights. The nanny state is way to evident and growing today.

I enjoy the peace and quiet of my lake front cottage, but I also enjoy seeing a really fast boat go from Centre Harbor to One Mile in like 10.5 seconds.

I would like to be part of a January 2nd meeting of everyone to modify the speed limit.

I can't welcome Elchase; he has said he sees no reason for compromise, "he has already won, he'll meet us in the halls of the Capital". I don't see any reason to extend an invitation to him, unless he modifies his position on negotiation.

If there are folks from the SL Supporters, then I would very much like to hear their point of view and would very much like to discuss a compromise.

[jmen24]

El, thank you for your response, but you have missed a point in my post that asks not to pick apart peoples reasons.

Also, if you have been paying attention to my posts from, well as far back as you want to go, you would know that I do spend time on Winni (this year and every year) as I have family that have multiple boats from 26' down to 16'. And, that I have already stated that I have not noticed a difference from 10 years ago to now. My feelings on the lake traffic have not changed either. I am a huge fan of anything fast, no matter what the surface is, that it's on. And I am not scared of things that are fast. But you missed one very important thing in my post that makes you and me very different; When we wanted to use our boat on a quiet lake, we went to a different lake. We did not use Concord to try and get everyone else to leave.

BTW, how did you now what size boat we are looking at?

[BroadHopper]

I don't like any one that chastised the 150' rule either. I think that is the best law going for all of us. Whether we row, sail or motor. The meeting is about reaching a compromise. I don't want to get rid of the law because of the reasonable and prudent clause and strict penalty for speeding. I want to make it better and help all vessels boat safely. Right now the boneheads sees a huge loophole and they are taking advantage of it. Let's close it.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by elchase

It's in there.
The NHMP is not an expert in telling us what the citizens wanted and how satisfied they are with what they got. Why not just ask the citizens?

Wait, did you really just say that?

What does the NHMP care about the citizens opinions and feelings about the lake? The NHMP are EXPERTS on BOATING SAFETY, which is what this law is all about - correct?

But, it makes sense that you would disrespect and discount the NHMP's role in this process because they have gone on the record and conducted surveys (with those crazy facts again) that clearly show that speed is not an issue on Winni. But, I will agree with you here, what does the NHMP know about warm fuzzy feelings....????

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Wait, did you really just say that?

What does the NHMP care about the citizens opinions and feelings about the lake? The NHMP are EXPERTS on BOATING SAFETY, which is what this law is all about - correct?

But, it makes sense that you would disrespect and discount the NHMP's role in this process because they have gone on the record and conducted surveys (with those crazy facts again) that clearly show that speed is not an issue on Winni. But, I will agree with you here, what does the NHMP know about warm fuzzy feelings....????

Boy, after hearing the SL opposers bash the MP over issues of non enforcement of 150' rule, non enforcement of NWZ's, surly officers who have pulled them over, etc., why now the sudden surge of respect and credibility for their expertise? This flip flop makes your whole argument seem rather contrived to me. Especially after hearing so many of the SL opponent's complaints about some of these guys, I, like EL, don't want them telling me what to think. They work for the citizens of NH, not the other way around.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Boy, after hearing the SL opposers bash the MP over issues of non enforcement of 150' rule, non enforcement of NWZ's, surly officers who have pulled them over, etc., why now the sudden surge of respect and credibility for their expertise? This flip flop makes your whole argument seem rather contrived to me. Especially after hearing so many of the SL opponent's complaints about some of these guys, I, like EL, don't want them telling me what to think. They work for the citizens of NH, not the other way around.

I respectfully disagree Sunset. I do believe that any and all criticism of MP enforcement warranted or not was done constructively and with respect. I happen to know a couple MP personally and even I criticized them on a couple of points. I and others have said numerous times that the organization does yeoman's work with regard to the relatively small budget.

I feel as if your post is a misdirection. Ryan made a point and I do not believe Ryan has "bashed" the Marine Patrol. I also don't believe many if any have, as you said, "Bashed" the marine patrol.

Put that aside for a second and answer the actual question. Do you or do you not believe that the Marine Patrol knows more than you or I about the issue of safety on the lake? Are you saying that you and elchase and the 3 or 4 of you know more than Director Barrett, or Tim Dunleavy? So we should disregard their opinion because they are employees of the state? I do not expect this question to be answered directly because I know if I were any of you guys I would do my best to avoid answering it. I already know the answer.

Finally with all due respect and don't take this personally, you keep calling any argument that anyone has against the Speed Limit "contrived." I assure you that none of my posts are "contrived." My feelings on the issue are strong and they are true. I feel, as Ryan does, that the MP are the experts. I also feel, as I stated earlier, that this is a political issue for me and I am angry that Laws are allowed to pass on emotion without facts. Just as you have your feelings on the issue so do we. I'm sure your arguments are based on your feelings so it would be nice if you gave the same consideration to other people who post on this board and did not dismiss their feelings as "contrived."

Thanks
H

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Finally with all due respect and don't take this personally, you keep calling any argument that anyone has against the Speed Limit "contrived." I assure you that none of my posts are "contrived." My feelings on the issue are strong and they are true. I feel, as Ryan does, that the MP are the experts. I also feel, as I stated earlier, that this is a political issue for me and I am angry that Laws are allowed to pass on emotion without facts. Just as you have your feelings on the issue so do we. I'm sure your arguments are based on your feelings so it would be nice if you gave the same consideration to other people who post on this board and did not dismiss their feelings as "contrived."

Thanks
H

Clearly if Ryan can say this of the SL supporter's opinions

Originally Posted by Ryan

Even better, maybe this meeting could take place in Concord during one of the upcoming debates on the sunset provision. We're going to need more support against the lies and spin of the pro SL crowd in Concord rather than at Giuseppe's....

then I can call his arguments "contrived" without undue fear that I've hurt his feelings.

[Airwaves]

For those of you wondering about Elchase's response to me in post 402

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...&postcount=402

I direct you to the thread 'Economic dangers of an unnecessary boating law!' that elchase decided to respond to in this thead. Why not respond in the actual topical thread instead of this one?

Something you'll have to ask Elchase.

[VitaBene]

Mr Chase,

I will simplify it and remove any definition based wiggle room. I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL?

Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Mr Chase,

I will simplify it and remove any definition based wiggle room. I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL?

Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

No smoke + no mirrors + no spin = No answer!

R2B

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Mr Chase,

I will simplify it and remove any definition based wiggle room. I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL?

Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

I will most definitely admit to having "tweaked" the speed limit on our roads(though it's been many years since I've gotten a speeding ticket in my youth). What I havn't done is bragged on line to my friends about tweaking the speed limit (usually the discussion with the Mrs. is that speeding isn't a good example for the kids). I also have not blamed the roadway speed limits on someone else and their agenda, nor have I said that someone else is in my ancestral home so they're not going to take away my right to speed. I have never considered the speed limits on our roads as symptomatic of a stealth loss of my rights and liberties. OK, time to get off the computer and head to work...I want to give myself plenty of time to get there.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Boy, after hearing the SL opposers bash the MP over issues of non enforcement of 150' rule, non enforcement of NWZ's, surly officers who have pulled them over, etc., why now the sudden surge of respect and credibility for their expertise? This flip flop makes your whole argument seem rather contrived to me. Especially after hearing so many of the SL opponent's complaints about some of these guys, I, like EL, don't want them telling me what to think. They work for the citizens of NH, not the other way around.

I don't consider making statements pointing out real problems to be bashing. Just as on the roadways, there will always be incidents that involve a LEO that perhaps pushes when no push is needed. Most of us pointed out many times more that more enforcement was needed. This is not bashing, but a clear-cut statement that addresses a problem. Perhaps obscured in the entire SL discussion is safety. I think you'll find that the majority of SL opposers run in lockstep with the view of the Marine Patrol regarding safety and general boating issues on the water. They need more funds to do a better job, and that was pointed out many times as well.

The fact that you and others on the SL side do not share the MP's view of the real problems on the waterway is simply a reflection of a narrow view of the overall issues. This summer was a washout as far as weather goes, and boat traffic was way down, as were MP stops. We didn't invent the reality, reality just happened. Constructive criticism is always more beneficial than blind support or blind negativity.

[ApS]

Re: I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL? Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

That's easy for this Supporter to answer: I'm on record here as doing 'way over the limit, and getting ticketed (Trinidad, Colorado). Since keeping it at "nine-over" since that 1988 occasion, lawmen have looked the other way.

Just one year later, I was a passenger in a car that nearly hurtled off a deserted Colorado roadway—above the treeline. The four of us were going about 60 on a roadway marked for 40-MPH. We were all distracted by something at the time, but my perception "clicked-on" and alerted the driver—just in time to avoid breaking through an Armco barricade!

The Opponents here ridicule my repeated admonition to "develop, hone, and keep one's senses at-the-ready" while on the lake.

(To include perceiving, watching, but especially developing one's listening capabilities).

But the other six months a year, I'm reminded of that phrase as I move about my Florida yard. THIS Florida environment is loaded—not with Cap'n "B's"—but with scorpions!
|
|
|

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by elchase

Your boat would be just fine on Winnipesaukee now, except on the Broads during windy days. I have a small bowrider that has suddenly become plenty big enough. I know Merrymeeting well, and Winni is much like Merrymeeting now. And while many had lost their enjoyment of Winni in recent years, they are finding it to be a much better place now. I say this in all sincerity. I know you have been posting as an "anti", but if you give Winnipesaukee's new-found civility a chance, I'm sure you will come around quickly. You do not need a 30-ft boat to feel safe on Winni anymore.

I am sorry, but I have to laugh at this. You can't be seriously suggesting that a lake as big as Winnipesaukee is as calm as a much smaller lake such as Merrymeeting...because of the speed limit?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Things are getting a little intense around here...here's something to lighten things up. That boating accident link from EL above...I was unable to open the article itself but did you see the "discussion" from readers contained in the link. It makes all of us seem downright wholesome and civilized. The grenades that they lob at one another make us look like a bunch of choir boys.Check it out if you didn't get a chance.

I did read them, pretty bad indeed. One guy was the brother of the deceased. The accident discussed was determined to be cased from mechanical failure, a fact ignored by those cheering about the demise of the person. I've seen this on many newsgroups, where a tragic boating accident (regardless of the reasons), have led to some pretty outrageous attacks on that entire segment of the boating world.

I might add Sunset, I have tried to engage in a rational discussion of many of the accidents force fed on this forum. I think Yosemite Sam was the only person that actually looked at the rebuttal, and read the ensuing follow up to the incident. APS is still bewildered.

There is a great deal of prejudice in the pro SL crowd amongst the most vocal members. We've been unable to get through the prejudice, and I think that's why a meeting was suggested to break the ice. There's at least one supporter that is trying his level best to make sure that the message of hate and prejudice is not snuffed out. You've probably been given instructions to not deal with these people. If you met some of the opponents, you'd most likely find out their intentions are good, and they all share a camaraderie with boaters of all kinds.

It's not about agreeing, it's about discussion and rational thought. The accidents were pretty easy subjects for rational thought, because you can generally follow them to their conclusion. The 21' versus 40' boat accident generated discussion that I thought would point out the problems inherent with applying prejudice to law and/or opinions. It pointed out the problems for sure. I'm sure the only reason it was posted in the first place is that the OP doesn't read the articles

Let's face it, some people love to target one group or another. There are some GFBL people that poke fun at others, and vice versus. I choose not to associate with those people, but I don't throw whatever group they're in to the wolves either. People that engage in this behavior cannot have any camaraderie with the other side. They require constant opposition to whatever is said to keep the level of vitriol up. It's not about the issue, it's mostly about them and whatever agenda they have. Nothing gets accomplished of course, and they'll be the first ones gone if proven wrong.

There is a better way, and everyone can well choose to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. This was a first step in at least creating civility and letting everyone know that there are real people behind these keyboards.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Mr Chase,

I will simplify it and remove any definition based wiggle room. I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL?

Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

Yes

Not only have I violated the speed limit on roads I have violated the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, day and night.

Most people think going a little over a speed limit is ok. And we all know that the police allow it. It's just human nature.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Boy, after hearing the SL opposers bash the MP over issues of non enforcement of 150' rule, non enforcement of NWZ's, surly officers who have pulled them over, etc., why now the sudden surge of respect and credibility for their expertise? This flip flop makes your whole argument seem rather contrived to me. Especially after hearing so many of the SL opponent's complaints about some of these guys, I, like EL, don't want them telling me what to think. They work for the citizens of NH, not the other way around.

While I wouldn't consider it 'bashing', there are ways the MP could enforce the laws pre SL that would make the lake SAFER. My contention from the beginning has always been Education and Enforcement of the existing laws will eliminate the real problem on the lake; Captain B.

In the end, the MP will present the facts in Concord. I would hope those that represent us can separate the facts from the spin.

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Why not respond in the actual topical thread instead of this one? Something you'll have to ask Elchase.

The posting limit on me forces me to multi-quote. Sorry. This is really all just one big thread anyway. All the topics might start out about someone's prop, or the CG statistics, or FISHING, then turn right into the same old SL-bashing tripe...and all the players are the same...so what difference does it make where the answer pops up? As a SL opposer, you probably are allowed infinite unmoderated posting privileges, so if you'd like to quote my reply in the other thread, be my guest.

Originally Posted by Ryan

What does the NHMP care about the citizens opinions and feelings about the lake?

Apparently nothing. But that's ok, it is not their responsibility to care about our feelings. And it is also not their responsibility to advocate for the high-speed crowd. It is their sole responsibility to enforce the boating laws that the legislature hands down to them.

Originally Posted by Ryan

The NHMP are EXPERTS on BOATING SAFETY, which is what this law is all about - correct?

Not fully. The law was enacted because so many people said they did not feel safe on the lake and that their enjoyment of the lake was either being prevented or otherwise impacted. Recall that RSA 270:1 (II) states “the public waters ... shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment... ”). No matter how the Director of the MP, who is on record over and over advocating for the high speed crowd and insulting the majority of NH's citizens might couch things, he cannot speak for the lack of enjoyment we felt prior to the SL and wealth of enjoyment we felt last summer. I've seen no survey done by the MP where they have asked a statistically reliable and broad-based sampling of citizens whether they feel that "safe and mutual enjoyment" of the lake has been improved by the SL.

Originally Posted by chipj29

I am sorry, but I have to laugh at this. You can't be seriously suggesting that a lake as big as Winnipesaukee is as calm as a much smaller lake such as Merrymeeting...because of the speed limit?

No. It's clear that what I meant was that it is calm when the wind dies down. As I said, it is more civil...similar in civility now to Merrymeeting, because of the SL. Jmen stated that he had been using Merrymeeting instead of Winni in past years because "it was much quiter and more relaxing". It is my experience, and the experience of virtually all that I speak with except the eight of you guys, that Winnipesaukee was just as "quiet and relaxing" as Merrymeeting this past summer, presumably because of the weather in many cases and because of the SL in others.

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I will simplify it and remove any definition based wiggle room. I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL? Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

As I did answer; only a fool would admit to breaking the law on a public forum. There might be a number of fools among the eight of you, but just because you demand a yes/no answer does not mean you are entitled to one. Do you really think this issue is about a boater occasionally going 48MPH or about the MP not enforcing a 45MPH speed limit against him? We have people on this forum who brag about doing almost double the speed limit, and the rest of you high-five them. Then you talk about "allying" yourselves with our law enforcement agency and legislature, as if "allying" with admitted criminals and their abettors who flout the law that these civil servants have passed or are obliged to enforce against the citizens these civil servants are obliged to serve is going to fly. Don't try to drag me into this hole. I am not one of you and do not condone your illegal activities of your support for them.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by elchase

It is their sole responsibility to enforce the boating laws that the legislature hands down to them.

Not their sole responsibility. In addition to enforcing the boating laws, the MP was also asked to provide a survey of speeding on the lake. We all know the results.

Originally Posted by elchase

The law was enacted because so many people said they did not feel safe on the lake and that their enjoyment of the lake was either being prevented or otherwise impacted. Recall that RSA 270:1 (II) states “the public waters ... shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment... ”). No matter how the Director of the MP, who is on record over and over advocating for the high speed crowd and insulting the majority of NH's citizens might couch things, he cannot speak for the lack of enjoyment we felt prior to the SL and wealth of enjoyment we felt last summer. I've seen no survey done by the MP where they have asked a statistically reliable and broad-based sampling of citizens whether they feel that "safe and mutual enjoyment" of the lake has been improved by the SL.

Don't kid yourself. There was no palpable improvement on the lake in 2009. The law was enacted based on fear and lies.

While I do not own a GFBL boat, I'm sure many that do own these types of boats get enjoyment travelling through the broads on a Tuesday afternoon on a calm day at 50MPH. Why do you feel entitled to take away their enjoyment through feel good legislation?

[BroadHopper]

The same reason why the person that took away the tolling of the church bell in Meredith a few years back. So he can enjoy his peace and quiet.
Many folks grew up with that bell. It was here before that person move into town. Yet he had the right to shut down tradition. Pretty soon all traditions around the lake and on the lake will be outlawed.

Racing and the need for speed was a tradition on this lake. Another tradition bites the dust. And more traditions after that.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by elchase

The posting limit on me forces me to multi-quote. Sorry. This is really all just one big thread anyway. All the topics might start out about someone's prop, or the CG statistics, or FISHING, then turn right into the same old SL-bashing tripe...and all the players are the same...so what difference does it make where the answer pops up? As a SL opposer, you probably are allowed infinite unmoderated posting privileges, so if you'd like to quote my reply in the other thread, be my guest. Apparently nothing. But that's ok, it is not their responsibility to care about our feelings. And it is also not their responsibility to advocate for the high-speed crowd. It is their sole responsibility to enforce the boating laws that the legislature hands down to them. Not fully. The law was enacted because so many people said they did not feel safe on the lake and that their enjoyment of the lake was either being prevented or otherwise impacted. Recall that RSA 270:1 (II) states “the public waters ... shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment... ”). No matter how the Director of the MP, who is on record over and over advocating for the high speed crowd and insulting the majority of NH's citizens might couch things, he cannot speak for the lack of enjoyment we felt prior to the SL and wealth of enjoyment we felt last summer. I've seen no survey done by the MP where they have asked a statistically reliable and broad-based sampling of citizens whether they feel that "safe and mutual enjoyment" of the lake has been improved by the SL.

I know of similar cases in a town near me where the civilian police felt themselves to be omniscient and omnipotent and thought they were able to interpret what is best for people in their community...they were quickly relieved of this notion.

[Kracken]

I really believe both supporters and opponents should attend. It is clear that every member that is posting is concerned about safety. The disagreement is in the method. I can be objective and see the underlying philosophy of the speed limit supporters. I hope the speed limit supporters can understand the objections.

Maybe a face to face meeting will produce better results than the forum has. We do have a common ground here (safety), we need to build on it and develop a solution to present to Concord. Don’t get me wrong, the forum has been entertaining however after months of debate, nothing has been accomplished.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by elchase

No. It's clear that what I meant was that it is calm when the wind dies down. As I said, it is more civil...similar in civility now to Merrymeeting, because of the SL. Jmen stated that he had been using Merrymeeting instead of Winni in past years because "it was much quiter and more relaxing". It is my experience, and the experience of virtually all that I speak with except the eight of you guys, that Winnipesaukee was just as "quiet and relaxing" as Merrymeeting this past summer, presumably because of the weather in many cases and because of the SL in others.

I just want to point out one thing. There are a lot more than eight speed limit opponents. According to this poll http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=8368, only 46 people out of the 263 that voted are in favor of the current speed limit. It means that 217 people are speed limit opponents. 217>8. This poll was taken in August/September 2009.

According to this poll http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=8420, 112 people out of the 437 that voted were in favor of the speed limit. This means that 325 people are opposed to a speed limit. 325>8. This poll was taken in August-October 2009.

Therefore, your statement that you put in a large majority of your posts that says that eight people are against the speed limit is factually incorrect, and cannot be argued. There may only be eight people that are vocal about it on this forum, but it is obvious that a lot more are against it than you may think.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

I know of similar cases in a town near me where the civilian police felt themselves to be omniscient and omnipotent and thought they were able to interpret what is best for people in their community...they were quickly relieved of this notion.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here?

Are you saying the MP is irrelevant, or are you saying that we do not need one group making blanket laws based on what they feel is best for the people?

Thanks. I think?

[Kracken]

Does anybody know how many registered boats there are in New Hampshire?

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Yes

Not only have I violated the speed limit on roads I have violated the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, day and night.

Most people think going a little over a speed limit is ok. And we all know that the police allow it. It's just human nature.

Thank you and Sunset for your honesty.

I agree with your assessment (that magic less than 10 on 93) on the roadway SL. My point was we all break or bend rules (some probably by using this forum right now) but that does not make us criminals or even scofflaws.

I wonder what the enforcement wiggle room will be if MP actually starts trying to measure speed.

The fact is that everyone breaks the SL (except maybe my mother), the worst offenders are often LEO. In VA they have installed traffic cams that automatically send tickets to offenders, quite a few were handed out to the police (and not going to calls).

Anyhow it is too bad that we strayed off topic on many of these threads regarding the SL. There has been a lot of talk about compromises and a few members call this the compromise. What if this law sunsets? Let's assume that for my next statement. I have read some great points from many on both sides, such as

1) Doubling the the distance from shore that requires headway only
2) Creating more NWZs near camps
3) 35 MPH SL in our tighter areas (such as the run from Moultonborough Bay to Green's Basin)
4) Increased SL out on the broads with an increased distance "bubble"
5) Adopting a version of the USCG Rule 6 (as follows)

RULE 6
SAFE SPEED
Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:

(a) By all vessels:

The state of visibility;
The traffic density including concentrations of fishing vessels or any other vessels;
The manageability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability in the prevailing conditions;
At night, the presence of background light such as from shore lights or from back scatter from her own lights;
The state of wind, sea and current, and the proximity of navigational hazards;
The draft in relation to the available depth of water.
(b)Additionally, by vessels with operational radar:

The characteristics, efficiency and limitations of the radar equipment;
Any constraints imposed by the radar range scale in use;
The effect on radar detection of the sea state, weather and other sources of interference;
The possibility that small vessels, ice and other floating objects may not be detected by radar at an adequate range;
The number, location and movement of vessels detected by radar;
The more exact assessment of the visibility that may be possible when radar is used to determine the range of vessels or other objects in the vicinity.

We all want to have a safe lake, I believe adopting and enforcing some of the above would accomplish that better than the law that is set to sunset next year.

Originally Posted by Ryan

the MP was also asked to provide a survey of speeding on the lake.

Did you just make that up? They certainly were not "asked to provide a survey". In fact, if you look back at the history, you'll see that they took it upon themselves to conduct a contrived and unscientific "survey" that most impartial observers said did more to slow boats down before clocking them than it did to see covertly what was really going on out there. And the Legislature saw through this attempt to circumvent and sidetrack the pending legislation and got upset, actually publicly scolding the MP over it...so the "survey" was debunked and discontinued. The MP did a wonderful job last summer by accident. It must have killed them to see things slow down so much that they could only find one speeder all summer. But the truth eventually surfaces, no matter how hard some try to obscure it. If boaters are not speeding, you just can't give out tickets.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Why do you feel entitled to take away their enjoyment?

Because "their enjoyment" prevents "mutual enjoyment". It's not all about making sure that the high-speed crowd enjoys the lake, its about making it mutually enjoyable for a variety of co-existable uses. Its either a choice of the need-for-speed over everything else or a choice of everything else over the need-for-speed. Which do you think a legislator is going to choose?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Racing and the need for speed was a tradition on this lake.

Sanctioned racing under the supervision of the MP over a closed-off portion of the lake, as has always been the tradition until the advent of the GFBL, boat can still be a tradition. Nobody is going to object to a return of the weekend of offshore boating races...provided it is appropriately planned, noticed, and supervised. As to the "need for speed" this sounds like something worthy of therapy.

Originally Posted by chipj29

According to this poll http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=8368
According to this poll http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=8420, ... it is obvious that a lot more are against it than you may think.

Please tell me exactly how many of these were citizens of NH, how many times each voted under different names and from different computers, how they were RANDOMLY SELECTED, and how you can be sure of all this. Otherwise, these are not "polls" just because you call them "polls". They are recruitment sheets.

Originally Posted by Airwaves

I know that elchase posted his response to another thread...why? Probably because he wants this one, like the actual Coast Guard and Marine Patrol information to disappear.

I loved the CG thread until it morphed into just one more Anti-SL clone. It gave me a chance to enlighten readers to how CG categorizes fatalities according to the speed that the boat of the victim was in...so that if a 85MPH cigarette boat runs over a stationary canoe, it is a 0MPH fatality, not an "excessive speed" fatality.

Originally Posted by Airwaves

What matters is the findings of the economic impact of boating in NH.

Exactly. Boating is a huge source of income for the state and we can't risk that income just to satisfy the "need for speed" of a tiny few.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by elchase

Did you just make that up? They certainly were not "asked to provide a survey". In fact, if you look back at the history, you'll see that they took it upon themselves to conduct a contrived and unscientific "survey" that most impartial observers said did more to slow boats down before clocking them than it did to see covertly what was really going on out there. And the Legislature saw through this attempt to circumvent and sidetrack the pending legislation and got upset, actually publicly scolding the MP over it...so the "survey" was debunked and discontinued.

The results do not support your cause, so your spin is expected.

Looking back in history, the NH Division of Safety Services used MP resources to conduct the survey. Unscientific, hardly. There is so much relevant, factual data in the report all you can do is attack the MP and spin the data. The DSS published their findings in a report, so to say the survey was discontinued is false. Public scolding....laughable.

Average daytime speed on the lake 22.72MPH.

Sounds like the Wild West!!!!!

[Seeker]

Count me as one of the 217 who voted against the SL in the poll. And yes I am a NH resident and one of my boats was on Winnie. Not all of us have to continually post (if we did El would wear out his keyboard) and I doubt there are many with 25+ screen names.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Ryan

The results do not support your cause, so your spin is expected.

Looking back in history, the NH Division of Safety Services used MP resources to conduct the survey. Unscientific, hardly. There is so much relevant, factual data in the report all you can do is attack the MP and spin the data. The DSS published their findings in a report, so to say the survey was discontinued is false. Public scolding....laughable.

Average daytime speed on the lake 22.72MPH.

Sounds like the Wild West!!!!!

Actually the transportation committee was the one that ask for the survey. I was at the fact finding meeting. The supporters says there is 'mayhem' on the lake and NHMP says it is not so. The supporters have no fact to back their claim and neither did the MP. So the committee wants the fact, hence the survey.

Funny thing is, the supporters shut down the survey early, because it was not in their favor. They claim the boaters knew where the survey was taking place. Not so. The MP posted two location, with 4 others that was indisclosed.

Same reason why they want to remove the sunset clause, the facts are not in their favor.

[DEJ]

You are correct about the disclosed locations for the speed info gathering. There were at least 4 undisclosed or covert positions from where MP gathered their info which they presented to the transposition committee per their request. Those are the simple facts, no spin.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Actually the transportation committee was the one that ask for the survey. I was at the fact finding meeting. The supporters says there is 'mayhem' on the lake and NHMP says it is not so. The supporters have no fact to back their claim and neither did the MP. So the committee wants the fact, hence the survey.

Funny thing is, the supporters shut down the survey early, because it was not in their favor. They claim the boaters knew where the survey was taking place. Not so. The MP posted two location, with 4 others that was indisclosed.

Same reason why they want to remove the sunset clause, the facts are not in their favor.

WOW! I never knew that. So in fact it was the transportation committeee itself that asked for the test?

These Senators must be banging their heads against the wall trying to figure out a way to spin the facts that support a Speed Limit. I really would like to see a televised explanation from one of the senators who supports the SL. It would be a riot to actually hear the words, "there have been no tickets, every single person has adhered to the law and we have stopped all those speeding boats from speeding all over the lake." I wonder if the good senator could actually say it with a straight face.

[Bear Islander]

SL supporters never requested or wanted the survey. The survey was proposed at the 11th hour by forces opposed to a speed limit. The purpose of the speed study was to hold the speed limit bill in committee and thereby delay it from going to the full legislature for an additional year.

As a delaying tactic it worked beautifully. However it was all a sham and nobody knowing the facts, including the Marine Patrol, ever took it seriously.

Adding insult to injury, the opposition then claimed WinnFABS requested the study.... pure fiction!

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by elchase

Please tell me exactly how many of these were citizens of NH, how many times each voted under different names and from different computers, how they were RANDOMLY SELECTED, and how you can be sure of all this. Otherwise, these are not "polls" just because you call them "polls". They are recruitment sheets.

Um, you must have misunderstood me. I was stating clearly that there are more than eight of us here on this site that are opposed to speed limits. It is a "poll" because that is what it is called on this forum. Who the people are, and where they are from makes no difference to me, since I am referring only to this site. I didn't realize that polls on an internet forum had to be from randomly selected individuals.

The facts are the facts. The fact that I am stating is that there are more than eight people who post on this site that are opposed to speed limits.

[DEJ]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

SL supporters never requested or wanted the survey.

How true that statement is, they knew what the results would be and the survey clearly showed there was NO speed issue on Winnipesaukee!

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by DEJ

How true that statement is, they knew what the results would be and the survey clearly showed there was NO speed issue on Winnipesaukee!

If absolutely no one was going faster than 45/25 then what is the problem...the SL hurts no one? Oh, I forgot, another unnecessary law on the books. Of course we know this isn't the case at all...many on this forum have admitted to significant violations of 45/25.

[DEJ]

Around and around and around we go, when will the spin end?

Laws should be and are for the most part are made to correct a problem. No problem which in this case was cleary shown by professionals did not exist then no law is required. That is the way it is supposed to work unless as I suspect there is a hidden agenda here.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by DEJ

Around and around and around we go, when will the spin end?

Laws should be and are for the most part are made to correct a problem. No problem which in this case was cleary shown by professionals did not exist then no law is required. That is the way it is supposed to work unless as I suspect there is a hidden agenda here.

But I just told you...many on this forum have admitted to speeding. This is why so many SL opponents are against the SL...they want to go fast...so there's the problem.

[gtagrip]

I too voted in the poll against the speed limit and I too live in NH.

[DEJ]

I think about 4 or 5 have admitted to going over the limit, is that many? And even BI was honest and admitted he did, does that make him a scofflaw?

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by DEJ

I think about 4 or 5 have admitted to going over the limit, is that many? And even BI was honest and admitted he did, does that make him a scofflaw?

Of course it doesn't make BI a scofflaw, he supports the speed limit.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

If absolutely no one was going faster than 45/25 then what is the problem...the SL hurts no one? Oh, I forgot, another unnecessary law on the books. Of course we know this isn't the case at all...many on this forum have admitted to significant violations of 45/25.

Actually, of the 3852 boats that were surveyed 36 boats were clocked over 45MPH (<1% of the total). These 36 boaters must not have received the memo to keep their speeds under 45MPH to skew the results of the survey.

[DoTheMath]

For the meeting, I'm in for the 2nd, I can make that happen... I'm in St. Maarten and St. Barths for the week of Jan 17th - 24th, that is my only exception right now.

Aside of that, let's get a list going - who's gonna show and who's gonna stay "hidden" behind the keyboard!? There will be no limits as to who can come and what they can say - with one simple exception. There will not be any personal attacks allowed during the discussion - period! Yes, that's right - I just appointed myself the "personal attack police" for this meeting! We can debate the topic at hand - the speed limit, pro's - con's - good - bad - etc... We NEED to keep it productive and positive, there is no room for variation and wavering on that, agreed!?!? Know now - and I am sure we all agree - attacks get personal, you WILL be asked to leave, a "zero-tolerance" policy if you will. I'm not driving up there, taking a day away from my family and whatever else I might be doing to listen to bickering and petty BS grade-school-level name calling. I can log in here and get more than enough of that and not have to leave my house. Let's remember, it shouldn't be a "for vs. against the SL" thing, it should be a "how do we reach a compromise, and what is it" thing!

Remember, we are all adults (chronologically anyway) so let's act that way... I am willing to bet that before the whole SL topic became an issue, we would have ALL been able to sit down, have a beer and share stories about the lake - good and bad - and get along. I for one, would love to hear more about BI's stories of trekking around the globe, or heading into space, it's like the Discovery Channel, but in real life HD!

So - list 'em folks - location can still be TBD for now, but the general lakes region should be the locale - Meredith, Laconia, etc...

DoTheMath - I'm in.

hazelnut - you're in, you're always good for a road trip up!

Who else...?

[BroadHopper]

Again, I have to remind everyone the reason. It is a known fact that WinnFabs is planning on more laws. Specifically horsepower and length limits. When I approach Rep. Pilliod about this he said, 'Speed Limit is a good start, we have to start somewhere'. So he didn't deny it. Many of us have heard the Winnfabs folks talking to NH Lakes Association representative about more restrictive laws. I'm just trying to prevent erosion of our rights to boat on the lake. If it is about safety, then let's pass safety laws, not laws that discriminate class of boaters.

I'm all for the penalty portion of the law. And to put in our DMV records. Let's replace the 45/25 with the reasonable and prudent clause and give it some teeth like the USCG rules. This will effect all class of boaters, not just the 2%. We need to reel in the boneheads and 'cowboys'. Any speed can be unreasonable and unprudent if the condition warrants. Setting 45/25 as an arbitray limit will send the wrong signal that this is the safe speed on this lake. Even when the conditions do not warrant. Just like the 150' limit. There should also be a reasonable and prudent clause. There can be conditions when 150' can be dangerous.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Again, I have to remind everyone the reason. It is a known fact that WinnFabs is planning on more laws. Specifically horsepower and length limits. When I approach Rep. Pilliod about this he said, 'Speed Limit is a good start, we have to start somewhere'. So he didn't deny it. Many of us have heard the Winnfabs folks talking to NH Lakes Association representative about more restrictive laws. I'm just trying to prevent erosion of our rights to boat on the lake. If it is about safety, then let's pass safety laws, not laws that discriminate class of boaters.

I'm all for the penalty portion of the law. And to put in our DMV records. Let's replace the 45/25 with the reasonable and prudent clause and give it some teeth like the USCG rules. This will effect all class of boaters, not just the 2%. We need to reel in the boneheads and 'cowboys'. Any speed can be unreasonable and unprudent if the condition warrants. Setting 45/25 as an arbitray limit will send the wrong signal that this is the safe speed on this lake. Even when the conditions do not warrant. Just like the 150' limit. There should also be a reasonable and prudent clause. There can be conditions when 150' can be dangerous.

And therein lies the rub. What I have been saying all along. This is the beginning of a very slippery slope. I know that some of you supporters think we are being paranoid but I'm telling you we are not. There are people out there looking to try and shape this lake into "On Golden Pond." Horsepower limits, length limits, two stroke bans, etc. etc. are just around the corner.

Sunset if we do as you suggest, just turn a blind eye and accept this, we are losing the beginning battle in a long war. So perhaps you don't care if HP limits, length limits and two stroke bans etc. are enacted. I don't know your stance. I for one think that this is the beginning of a bad, bad time for Lake Winnipesaukee.

This is not a "sky is falling" mentality. It's reality. I know there are many on your side telling you that it's just not true but it is. I can tell you that BI will at least be honest and tell you that the HP limit is a not too distant reality. Bye bye cruisers. Some will applaud, the same individuals who are applauding the speed limit. It is biased targeting. I think it is a shame. This is not Squam lake. This lake has its own identity. If you want Squam move to squam. Many chose this lake due to its personality. Many are trying to shape it into something it is not nor will ever be.

[LIforrelaxin]

So as I read the threads and the always constant back and forth between sides. I always come back to something. The same thing really. The one thing that both sides want. What is that you may ask. That is SAFTY.

Now why does OCD keep saying that he would like to see both sides at a meeting. Because he understands the overwhelming concern here SAFTY.

Look all kinds of laws can be passed speed limits, size restrictions, cahnging the 150' rule to the 1000' rule.... but in the end it comes down to education. Education about safe boating practices. Laws really aren't the solution here folks finding a way to educate new boaters that is the key. Making legislator pass laws that make sense like a safe and prudent speed law..... these are the things we need.

Now some people have comment that the lake felt safer this year. Well here is some food for thought. 1) we have a boating certificate law, so no one comes up and rents a boat on a whim any more. And buddy doesn't come up and take his uncles boat out for a quick spin either. 2) The economy is bad and gas pricies are high, so while us die hards didn't let it get in our way there are plenty of people that didn't use there boats all that much the past couple of years. 3) Instead of running around in thier boats all day people spent much more time at anchor or docked.

Anyway you look at it you can't say the speed limit in and of itself help change the lake. Their are to many other factors.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Again, I have to remind everyone the reason. It is a known fact that WinnFabs is planning on more laws. Specifically horsepower and length limits. When I approach Rep. Pilliod about this he said, 'Speed Limit is a good start, we have to start somewhere'. So he didn't deny it. Many of us have heard the Winnfabs folks talking to NH Lakes Association representative about more restrictive laws. I'm just trying to prevent erosion of our rights to boat on the lake. If it is about safety, then let's pass safety laws, not laws that discriminate class of boaters.

I'm all for the penalty portion of the law. And to put in our DMV records. Let's replace the 45/25 with the reasonable and prudent clause and give it some teeth like the USCG rules. This will effect all class of boaters, not just the 2%. We need to reel in the boneheads and 'cowboys'. Any speed can be unreasonable and unprudent if the condition warrants. Setting 45/25 as an arbitray limit will send the wrong signal that this is the safe speed on this lake. Even when the conditions do not warrant. Just like the 150' limit. There should also be a reasonable and prudent clause. There can be conditions when 150' can be dangerous.

It's going to be a funny few years. The economy sucked, and the weather was bad this year. Both Sunset (cute SN) , and El, said the lake was shear delight this summer. They gave the SL credit. I don't know why, El has repeatedly scoffed at most of the laws on the lake, including the 150' rule.

Now picture this. They both start to get together with the WinnFabs crew, and stir up some debate regarding horsepower and boat size. Ahead of this, they've told everyone that the lake is a beautiful, safe place for everyone now. So what changed? Nothing. Nothing at all. They will wait until the economy and the weather conspire to bring back the boaters. Then, all of a sudden, the SL law is not enough, we need more.

There are only a couple of occupations I know where hypocrisy pays well. Politics, and Lawyers. These threads will serve as a great record, they already have.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

For the meeting, I'm in for the 2nd, I can make that happen... I'm in St. Maarten and St. Barths for the week of Jan 17th - 24th, that is my only exception right now.

Aside of that, let's get a list going - who's gonna show and who's gonna stay "hidden" behind the keyboard!? There will be no limits as to who can come and what they can say - with one simple exception. There will not be any personal attacks allowed during the discussion - period! Yes, that's right - I just appointed myself the "personal attack police" for this meeting! We can debate the topic at hand - the speed limit, pro's - con's - good - bad - etc... We NEED to keep it productive and positive, there is no room for variation and wavering on that, agreed!?!? Know now - and I am sure we all agree - attacks get personal, you WILL be asked to leave, a "zero-tolerance" policy if you will. I'm not driving up there, taking a day away from my family and whatever else I might be doing to listen to bickering and petty BS grade-school-level name calling. I can log in here and get more than enough of that and not have to leave my house. Let's remember, it shouldn't be a "for vs. against the SL" thing, it should be a "how do we reach a compromise, and what is it" thing!

Remember, we are all adults (chronologically anyway) so let's act that way... I am willing to bet that before the whole SL topic became an issue, we would have ALL been able to sit down, have a beer and share stories about the lake - good and bad - and get along. I for one, would love to hear more about BI's stories of trekking around the globe, or heading into space, it's like the Discovery Channel, but in real life HD!

So - list 'em folks - location can still be TBD for now, but the general lakes region should be the locale - Meredith, Laconia, etc...

DoTheMath - I'm in.

hazelnut - you're in, you're always good for a road trip up!

Who else...?

Thank you DTM.... I am up for any discussion.. But that doesn't have to be the only reason for getting together either.

No matter what side of the coin we are on in this debate one thing that makes us all alike is our love for the lake. If we didn't care we wouldn't be bantering about it and joining a forum just to discuss it and how it is run. I think whether we agree or not we all want what is best for the lakes region.

That being said, I bet we all would have a great time together. Even if we don't agree on speed limits we all obviously enjoy conversing about them because we have been doing it for years. Lets put the names with faces. This way people may not be so quick to engage in personal attacks and such because you actually know who it is you are talking to.

While we all feel passionate about the speed limits we are all more passionate about the lake. So lets get together and see what happens. No personal attacks on people just a good time to get to know each other.

I don't think we are going to come away with the Geneva Convention but at least it is the first step to working together.

I'm in

DTM

Broadhopper

Who else? Can we get Sunset and BI???

[gtagrip]

I will also attend.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by gtagrip

I will also attend.

I am in. Hopefully we will be able to sled to the meet and greet!

[OCDACTIVE]

looks like we already have a good group of people looking to meet and maybe get something accomplished:

OCD
Vita
Gtagrip
Dothemath
Broadhopper.

I hope Don may join us?? Anyone want to reach out to him? or maybe he will see this?

so far 5 opposers? Any supporters want to throw their hat in?

[luckypete]

so who's going to man the metal detector at the door?

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by luckypete

so who's going to man the metal detector at the door?

That won't be needed.

[NoBozo]

Are concealed weapons OK? (Permit Required) I've got a blanket and a baseball bat. Is that OK?.......I'm concerned for my Safety. The EL-Man mentioned personal safety......... After all...that's what all this is all about..RIGHT..?? SAFETY. I'm all for Safety.


This is all Tongue in Cheek...................................RIGHT..??

[hazelnut]

I already said I was in. I'd love to meet bear islander. I'm thinking that we'd all enjoy each others company. I am actually in Meredith tonight. Had a niceMeal at Giuseppes and I'm loving this cold night dreaming of snow and ice and sleds!!!!!

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

Are concealed weapons OK? (Permit Required) I've got a blanket and a baseball bat. Is that OK?.......I'm concerned for my Safety. The EL-Man mentioned personal safety......... After all...that's what all this is all about..RIGHT..?? SAFETY. I'm all for Safety.


This is all Tongue in Cheek...................................RIGHT..??

Originally Posted by luckypete

so who's going to man the metal detector at the door?

OK, a couple of you guys are starting to give me the creeps.

[RTTOOL]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Again, I have to remind everyone the reason. It is a known fact that WinnFabs is planning on more laws. Specifically horsepower and length limits. When I approach Rep. Pilliod about this he said, 'Speed Limit is a good start, we have to start somewhere'. So he didn't deny it. Many of us have heard the Winnfabs folks talking to NH Lakes Association representative about more restrictive laws. I'm just trying to prevent erosion of our rights to boat on the lake. If it is about safety, then let's pass safety laws, not laws that discriminate class of boaters.

I'm all for the penalty portion of the law. And to put in our DMV records. Let's replace the 45/25 with the reasonable and prudent clause and give it some teeth like the USCG rules. This will effect all class of boaters, not just the 2%. We need to reel in the boneheads and 'cowboys'. Any speed can be unreasonable and unprudent if the condition warrants. Setting 45/25 as an arbitray limit will send the wrong signal that this is the safe speed on this lake. Even when the conditions do not warrant. Just like the 150' limit. There should also be a reasonable and prudent clause. There can be conditions when 150' can be dangerous.

there is a neighbor of mine that is on winnfab .he said to me when they get speed limit threw they are going after boat that displaces five thousand gallons water. so what dose this mean 32ft boat and larger???????

[ApS]

"...It is biased targeting...This is not Squam lake. This lake has its own identity. If you want Squam move to Squam. Many chose this lake due to its personality. Many are trying to shape it into something it is not nor will ever be..."

Even after 53 seasons on Lake Winnipesaukee, I am criticized with the words, "This isn't your lake".

I never, ever, thought of Lake Winnipesaukee as "my lake" until aggressive boaters tried to take it away!




My first post to make it to this page?

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

OK, a couple of you guys are starting to give me the creeps.

they are joking around.... Seriously I hope you come.

[DoTheMath]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Thank you DTM.... I am up for any discussion.. But that doesn't have to be the only reason for getting together either.

No matter what side of the coin we are on in this debate one thing that makes us all alike is our love for the lake. If we didn't care we wouldn't be bantering about it and joining a forum just to discuss it and how it is run. I think whether we agree or not we all want what is best for the lakes region.

That being said, I bet we all would have a great time together. Even if we don't agree on speed limits we all obviously enjoy conversing about them because we have been doing it for years. Lets put the names with faces. This way people may not be so quick to engage in personal attacks and such because you actually know who it is you are talking to.

While we all feel passionate about the speed limits we are all more passionate about the lake. So lets get together and see what happens. No personal attacks on people just a good time to get to know each other.

I don't think we are going to come away with the Geneva Convention but at least it is the first step to working together.

I'm in

DTM

Broadhopper

Who else? Can we get Sunset and BI???

OCD - you are correct, I was going for that, just wasn't explicit enough - but I totally agree!

And let's remember this is a public forum - we all KNOW it's being said in a tongue-and-cheek manner, but let's refrain from the jokes about metal detectors, LTC's etc... Again - adults here, let's act like 'em.

So, we have a good number of opposer's ready to meet - let's get some supporters to sign up!? Bueller - anyone - Bueller!? Come one - come all - let's get a good, robust, dynamic group together and have a good "lake conversation" - about the lake and ALL that it encompasses. Aside of hazelnut (cuz we grew up together) I haven't met any of the rest of you. Probably have seen you around the lake, gas docks, restaurants, etc - but just didn't know it. It's been mentioned 100x, the common denominator here is... we all want a SAFE AND ENJOYABLE lake! So, how do we get there...?

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by RTTOOL

there is a neighbor of mine that is on winnfab .he said to me when they get speed limit threw they are going after boat that displaces five thousand gallons water. so what dose this mean 32ft boat and larger???????

Speed limits are just the beginning of a much larger agenda. Safety has been a rouse as the beginning reason to the movement against not only GFB but cruisers as well.

next measure will be to limit the overall size of the boat.

Give them an inch they take a mile!

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Speed limits are just the beginning of a much larger agenda. Safety has been a rouse as the beginning reason to the movement against not only GFB but cruisers as well. next measure will be to limit the overall size of the boat. Give them an inch they take a mile!

Nice olive branch. And you wonder why none of the supporters are accepting the "invitation"? Give me a break. You can't pretend to be our buddy one post and then insult us two posts later and expect any of us to take the bait.
Have fun at the Winnilaker's convention.

Supporters, don't fall for this rouse (sic). Don't be our "Olympia Snowe". This is just the trick that enabled Pelosi to call the Health Care vote "bipartisan".
The purpose of this meeting is obvious and the desire to have at least one of us attend is even more obvious. Let them meet amongst themselves and come up with their own "scofflaw's compromise solution" and come to Concord saying "Our need-for-speed group has a compromise that solves everyone's issues...eliminate the speed limit and return to the mayhem that saw boaters killing each other year after year". Then see how it flies.

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by RTTOOL

there is a neighbor of mine that is on winnfab .he said to me when they get speed limit threw they are going after boat that displaces five thousand gallons water. so what dose this mean 32ft boat and larger???????

5000 gallons of water weighs 40,000 pounds..@ 8 pounds/gallon. That's a pretty big boat. Probably not many boats on the lake that weigh/displace that much. A 32 foot "Leadmine" keel sailboat might weigh/displace 15,000 pounds. The 32 foot sailboat I had years ago weighed/displaced 10,800 pounds. 50% of that was the lead keel. NB

EDIT: The rule goes like this. "A floating object will displace an amount of water equal to its own weight."

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by Kracken

Does anybody know how many registered boats there are in New Hampshire?

In 2008 there were 96,205 registered boats in NH

Originally posted by Elchase
Quote:

The posting limit on me forces me to multi-quote. Sorry. This is really all just one big thread anyway. All the topics might start out about someone's prop, or the CG statistics, or FISHING, then turn right into the same old SL-bashing tripe...and all the players are the same...so what difference does it make where the answer pops up? As a SL opposer, you probably are allowed infinite unmoderated posting privileges, so if you'd like to quote my reply in the other thread, be my guest.

Whose fault is that? This thread is about the speed limit, the question you answered deals with the economic impact of boating in NH. Stick to the topics and stop being so insulting and maybe you'll get your posting priviledges back. So go other to that thread and tell us how chasing a class of boaters off the lake is going to help the economy.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by RTTOOL

there is a neighbor of mine that is on winnfab .he said to me when they get speed limit threw they are going after boat that displaces five thousand gallons water. so what dose this mean 32ft boat and larger???????

Originally Posted by hazelnut

And therein lies the rub. What I have been saying all along. This is the beginning of a very slippery slope. I know that some of you supporters think we are being paranoid but I'm telling you we are not. There are people out there looking to try and shape this lake into "On Golden Pond." Horsepower limits, length limits, two stroke bans, etc. etc. are just around the corner.

Sunset if we do as you suggest, just turn a blind eye and accept this, we are losing the beginning battle in a long war. So perhaps you don't care if HP limits, length limits and two stroke bans etc. are enacted. I don't know your stance. I for one think that this is the beginning of a bad, bad time for Lake Winnipesaukee.

This is not a "sky is falling" mentality. It's reality. I know there are many on your side telling you that it's just not true but it is. I can tell you that BI will at least be honest and tell you that the HP limit is a not too distant reality. Bye bye cruisers. Some will applaud, the same individuals who are applauding the speed limit. It is biased targeting. I think it is a shame. This is not Squam lake. This lake has its own identity. If you want Squam move to squam. Many chose this lake due to its personality. Many are trying to shape it into something it is not nor will ever be.

I seriously and sincerely want some of you to remember the above 2 quotes the next time the SL supporters are accused of "fear mongering". Some opposers warned the lake's region economy would similarly crash and burn. (BTW Hazelnut, I do in fact feel a little ashamed of using you in a multiquote after you taught me how to do it...)

Originally Posted by VtSteve

This summer was a washout as far as weather goes,

When SL supporters tell how civilized the lake seemed last summer, this is one argument we hear from the opposers. Actually half the summer was a washout. August and early September were beautiful.

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I will simplify it and remove any definition based wiggle room. I will respectfully again ask any SL supporter if they knowingly break the roadway SL?

Yes or No? It's real easy to answer.

I know of a guy from Long Lake Maine who had a list of automobile moving violations a mile long. He seemed to feel laws in general didn't apply to him. We all know the rest of the story. I hope no one buys his boat, NO PATIENCE, and brings it to Winnipesaukee.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

Nice olive branch. And you wonder why none of the supporters are accepting the "invitation"? Give me a break. You can't pretend to be our buddy one post and then insult us two posts later and expect any of us to take the bait.
Have fun at the Winnilaker's convention.

Supporters, don't fall for this rouse (sic). Don't be our "Olympia Snowe". This is just the trick that enabled Pelosi to call the Health Care vote "bipartisan".
The purpose of this meeting is obvious and the desire to have at least one of us attend is even more obvious. Let them meet amongst themselves and come up with their own "scofflaw's compromise solution" and come to Concord saying "Our need-for-speed group has a compromise that solves everyone's issues...eliminate the speed limit and return to the mayhem that saw boaters killing each other year after year". Then see how it flies.

I think plenty of Supporters know by now what you're all about El, and whatever screen name you had before. You depend on the Us versus Them to survive. The minute a suggestion for a cordial gathering was posted, I knew exactly what tact you'd take. I have given you credit for being intelligent and articulate. But you view this topic as a lifelong occupation (is it?). No room for middle ground, no handshakes, no listening, no common courtesy.

I've found on many forums, particularly those that deal with politics, particularly aggressive posters use Doppels to carry on conversations with themselves, when others have pretty much stopped. For those that actually read the links I posted as a follow up on one of your crash links, they know. Three people tried to do damage control on that one. I must admit, APS let me down by his contribution.

You'll be delighted to know Ed, that I'm monitored much more harshly than yourself. Five posts a day are only possible sometimes. I've had content edited, deleted, or forever lost in the abis. I keep copies, so I do get to read them to figure out if they went over any lines. Absolutely none are as confrontational as yours, and I don't post lies. So perhaps you should thank Don for the privileges he gives you.

But alas, this won't be posted?