Cabin Cruiser Operators - "WAKE UP!...no, WAKE DOWN"!

[Knot Droolin']

Ok, so the question begs to be asked:

In all of our minds, what is too big of a boat?

[TomC]

Originally Posted by Knot Droolin'

Ok, so the question begs to be asked:

In all of our minds, what is too big of a boat?

easy: "the next size up"

[tis]

Well, we can ban the GF boats, cruisers, then smaller boats who aren't on plane too close to the shore. How can we ban the wind, which does a pretty good number on shorelines?

[Silver Duck]

I've been waiting for this since certain of the "No performance boats" crowd made it clear a couple of years ago that cruisers were to be their next target.

So far as I'm concerned, the question which truly begs to be asked is where some folks get off thinking that their convenience in enjoying Lake Winnipesaukee in their chosen manner outweighs the ability of other folks to enjoy the lake in a diferent way.

Seaplane Pilot, since you saw fit to start this discussion with a reference to a non-Winnipesaukee incident, I'll counter by referring to the recent collision down in Louisiana between a seaplane and a small boat. Since seaplanes undeniably have litttle ability to manouver to avoid a collision once they're up on step during takeoff or have irrevocably committed to a landing, it could justifiably be said that at, certain times, they constitute a menace to navigation and boater safety.

Nobody really needs the convenience of being able land on the lake and taxi up to their dock; for folks who want to fly in, their plane could land at the Laconia airport. (It could easily be said that airplanes belong in an airport, the way that some folks are saying the cruisers belong in the ocean.) Perhaps seaplanes should be banned from Winnipesaukee for the safety of all? (No? Didn't think so. )

Now, as I recall, the cruisers in that link were in a no wake area and, if they were on Winnipesaukee, would have been too close to the other boats to be above now wake speeds to boot. (I suspect that they must have been related to Captain Bonehead. ) Here, I fully agree that anybody who operates their boat in an unsafe manner needs to be caught, fined, and, if they won't learn from that experience, lose their right to operate a boat on the lake. But, for heaven's sake, penalize the operator, not everybody who owns the same kind of boat!

Silver Duck

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

I've been waiting for this since certain of the "No performance boats" crowd made it clear a couple of years ago that cruisers were to be their next target.

So far as I'm concerned, the question which truly begs to be asked is where some folks get off thinking that their convenience in enjoying Lake Winnipesaukee in their chosen manner outweighs the ability of other folks to enjoy the lake in a diferent way.

You and I frequent the same cabin cruiser website where complaints between GFBLs and cabin cruisers are frequent. (And where the seaplane crash was referenced.)

Just this month at that site, the cabin cruisers are complaining of noisy, late-night, high-speed runs by GFBLs through no-wake zones where the cruiser types are sleeping. The GFBLs state "their legal right" to boat in anything they want to, and that their wakes are small. The cabin cruisers complain about fishermen, kayakers, and Jet-Skis in narrow channels. The GFBLs state wakes left by cruisers at any planing speed are a hazard to them, and that cruisers ignore no-wake zones until inside their marinas.

When I opened my Popular Science magazine this month, I found a full-page ad for "Discover Boating".

What a strange ad, I thought—who needs to "discover" boating .

The site is sponsored nationally by NMMA (American boat builders) who are seeing an increasing rejection of family boating by Americans!

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

The fact is, people are entitled to have whatever kind of boat they want on the lake.

"Entitlement" seems to be an issue: Winnipesaukee boaters with long memories remember when none of these issues were prominent.

The bottom line is that a few "excessive boats" are ruining boating for many—and not just here.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

You and I frequent the same cabin cruiser website where complaints between GFBLs and cabin cruisers are frequent. (And where the seaplane crash was referenced.)

Just this month at that site, the cabin cruisers are complaining of noisy, late-night, high-speed runs by GFBLs through no-wake zones where the cruiser types are sleeping. The GFBLs state "their legal right" to boat in anything they want to, and that their wakes are small. The cabin cruisers complain about fishermen, kayakers, and Jet-Skis in narrow channels. The GFBLs state wakes left by cruisers at any planing speed are a hazard to them, and that cruisers ignore no-wake zones until inside their marinas.

I can't recall the last time I heard of a speeding GFBL going down the Weirs Channel... Maybe elsewhere, not here...

Let's face it, this is about passing the buck. It always is. The GFBL's drive too fast or are too loud, the cabin cruisers make wake, the pwc dart around like flies annoying everyone, sail boats think they own the lake, paddlers do own the lake, the family boats don't know the rules of navigation...Unless all boats are banned this will NEVER go away. Is this what you want??? Maybe we should just go back to handmade birchbark canoes...

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

The bottom line is that a few "excessive boats" are ruining boating for many—and not just here.

Very true. Could not have said it better myself. I am glad we agree on something finally... If this is truly your belief then why punish the remaining 99% of good, responsible boaters with speed limits or limitization of the type/size of boats they can own and operate. Stop the discrimination and fix the problem.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

The bottom line is that a few "excessive boats" are ruining boating for many—and not just here.

Originally Posted by codeman671

Very true. Could not have said it better myself. I am glad we agree on something finally...

Oops. 'Got to fix that!

Originally Posted by codeman671

If this is truly your belief then why punish the remaining 99% of good, responsible boaters with speed limits or limitization of the type/size of boats they can own and operate.

Here's my "belief", based on NMMA's own website (boat manufacturers trying to reverse the decline in the family boating market), plus my personal observations:

"The few" are chasing away the family boater, thereby "growing" the percentage of irresponsible boaters.

[jetskier]

I want to thank the large cabin cruiser that ran in front of me at high speed near Black's Basin today. I had the right of way and ended up with a huge wake over the bow. Unbelievable!

[Ropetow]

Wonder if it was the same Jack Donkey who came up behind me (maybe 50 feet off my stern) off Echo Point in Alton Bay this afternoon. At least I didn't need to hose down the interior of my bow-rider later!

[Islander]

Sounds like we need a horsepower limit!

[chipj29]

YES! Because one captain bonehead is representative of an entire class of boats.

[Weekend Pundit]

Just today my missus, son, and a friend were returning from a trip down to Alton Bay to visit a friend and a Carver came through the passage between Pig and Lockes Island at mush-speed. We were trying to get into Smith Cove before the afternoon thunderstorm hit and we had to throttle way back (we didn't want to get airborne!) and endure a soaking from the wake that came splashing over the bow. We didn't get nearly that wet from the rain shower we passed through not 10 minutes before.

The fellow driving the boat (I refuse to say he was piloting because he was just futzing around) was oblivious to the effect his wake was having on the other traffic trying to get in and out of Glendale and Smith's Cove.

Some folks are just clueless. What's worse, some choose to stay that way.

[Gatto Nero]

Most of the big cruisers have names on them, right? Perhaps, rather than bundling them all into one category and cursing them as a group, the ones that do something really stupid should be called out by the name of their vessel, with a description of the incident. Minimally, I would think the indignation of being called out as an inconsiderate captain would make them more cognizant of the results of their actions, but it would also allow them the opportunity to state their case and explain why they think their actions were misrepresented.

That would make for some fun reading.

[jrc]

Depending on how you define big, there can't be more than twenty big crusiers berthed in Smith cove. Go find the boat and make the owner responsible for his wake.

A lot of boat owners don't realize that going slower (mush speed) makes a much bigger wake than fully on plane. Maybe we should but that on the seat cushions.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by jrc

Depending on how you define big, there can't be more than twenty big crusiers berthed in Smith cove.

Not a good guess...

[Weekend Pundit]

That cruiser didn't come out of Smith Cove, but from Saunders Bay. He was heading east and cut across the entrance to Glendale and Smith Cove.

I would have checked his bow number or written down the name on the transom but was too busy dealing with the aftermath of the drenching and I didn't want to tarry as the thunderstorms were almost upon us.

Next time, assuming there is a next time (and of course there will be), I'll be ready with a digital still or video camera...or at least a piece of paper and a scibble stick.

[jrc]

Well if he came out of Saunders, there's a lot more big cruisers in there. It's surprising that people go through that channel when they don't have to. It's my first year in there and I never seem to be able to plane up until I reach FL 26 or FL 53. There's not a lot of boats, they just seem to spaced just right.

From a distance, I saw the Mount Washington go through that channel two years ago. I wish I was closer.

[Silver Duck]

It's not just the cruiser operators that seem to be clueless this season. I was on vacation last week, and did a lot of cruising at a nice, easy 1200 - 1500 rpm pace; I lost count of the number of boneheads in "family bowriders" that zipped past me within 50 feet.

I even had an encounter with one of the excursion boats that zipped past me in a no wake zone and came so close that I had to reverse my engines!

Somehow, I gt the feeling that the mandatory boating safety course isn't working all that well....

Silver Duck

[wildwoodfam]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

It's not just the cruiser operators that seem to be clueless this season. I was on vacation last week, and did a lot of cruising at a nice, easy 1200 - 1500 rpm pace; I lost count of the number of boneheads in "family bowriders" that zipped past me within 50 feet.

I even had an encounter with one of the excursion boats that zipped past me in a no wake zone and came so close that I had to reverse my engines!

Somehow, I gt the feeling that the mandatory boating safety course isn't working all that well....

Silver Duck

and I hope you filed an official complaint to the Crusie Line!

I didn't realize any of the excursion boats on Winni were capable of zipping...I know they throw big wakes - was a favorite past time of my friends and I to take our 15 hp aluminium boats and run them through the wakes of Sophie and Doris!! They were cruising with their big ole wakes - but I would not say they were zippy...