In the Spirit of Compromise....

[LakeSnake]

What about limiting the 45mph during the day to any Bay, Cove, Harbor? Then the measument problem (500 or 1000 feet) would be eliminated. No need to mark these places as they are already noted as such on the lake maps.

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by LakeSnake

What about limiting the 45mph during the day to any Bay, Cove, Harbor? Then the measument problem (500 or 1000 feet) would be eliminated. No need to mark these places as they are already noted as such on the lake maps.

I would accept that compromise, but I think it is a problem to say go run as fast as you want in the broads. As someone has previously mentioned in one of the only things I agreed with...the broads are great for sailing and fishing so to say guys are going to run 70mph there probably wont work, unless there is a 500 or even a 1000' foot rule there.

I would even agree to a 1000' rule, even though I think it is way excessive..that is almost a 1/4 mile. I still would like someone to answer my question as what harm I am causing over 500' away going say 60 vs 45?

I have not been on here that long and wow this is a tough issue when you consider both sides of it.

There are always going to be boaters that do not use good common sense and my plea is that those few should not impact the majority of us who try and do the right thing and are considerate of our fellow captains and their passengers.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by onlywinni

I would accept that compromise, but I think it is a problem to say go run as fast as you want in the broads. As someone has previously mentioned in one of the only things I agreed with...the broads are great for sailing and fishing so to say guys are going to run 70mph there probably wont work, unless there is a 500 or even a 1000' foot rule there.

I would even agree to a 1000' rule, even though I think it is way excessive..that is almost a 1/4 mile. I still would like someone to answer my question as what harm I am causing over 500' away going say 60 vs 45?

I have not been on here that long and wow this is a tough issue when you consider both sides of it.

There are always going to be boaters that do not use good common sense and my plea is that those few should not impact the majority of us who try and do the right thing and are considerate of our fellow captains and their passengers.

Personally I think double the distance (300 feet) would be sufficient but I think that number would not appeal to the SL supporters. When we get into arbitrary numbers like 500, 1000, what we need to do is come up with distances that people have a chance at figuring out. For example 100 yards is pretty easy to identify with a lot of people as it is a length of a football field. The real problem with distances is that it is all subjective. As we all know most people have no clue what 150 feet looks like! The "Speed Zone" idea has problems as was pointed out by some because it does not address those who feel uncomfortable with a boat doing 60 + at 150 feet away from their Sailboat, Kayak, whatever. I still think the increased distance idea has merit but clarification would be necessary in terms of an easily identifiable length.

[Kracken]

Bear Islander,

Thank you for reaching across the isle. My opinion of you just went up 100%, (just kidding). It would be ideal if both sides could reach compromise that all the members of this forum could live with. Then we could approach the legislature with something that satisfied everybody. We just need to hear more from the supporter’s side.

On a lighter note…

We could then sell the rights to the speed limit threads. There is some seriously funny stuff in there.

[OCDACTIVE]

Personally I would like the compromise to look something like this:

50 daytime
30 nightime

unlimited in the broads...

Now we have to determine how to enforce it, and if that is plausible.

While this is my idea of an ideal compromise, as mentioned, educating the public to where and when is very difficult.

Although it isn't my favorite I think the distance rules are easier to enforce, less expensive, and has a greater chance of success of passing.

As mentioned Capt. B's have trouble determining 150', however SL or no SL, nothing is going to change that.... But for the few that have trouble determining that distance over water, the majority if not all don't have the ability to travel over the 45 mph anyway. As mentioned the vast majority of capt b's are not out in $100K GFB's.... (not saying there isn't a couple but just going on %'s here)

So I propose that we double the distance for over 45mph.. make it 300 ft..

The reasons I propose that is:

1. it has been done already for PWC (distance they need to be from shore)
2. 300 ft is easier to determine for an everyday boater because:
A. It's double of the current 150 ft which they are expected to know
B. A easy analogy can be drawn to 1 football field
3. Marine Patrol will not have to spend extra funds in which to enforce this.
4. It will eliminate the ability to go over 45 mph is smaller coves / bays. (rather then having to specify on the chart) - If you look at the chart being 300 ft in every direction of boat or land pretty much takes care of (alton, wolfboro, anywhere north of moultonboro bay, most of paugus, all the islands, graveyard, barbers pole etc)

I think that listing:

45mph on the lake or unlimited if over 300 ft from any vessel or land mass.
30 mph night

It just makes it very simple for enforcement and easy to understand.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by LakeSnake

What about limiting the 45mph during the day to any Bay, Cove, Harbor? Then the measument problem (500 or 1000 feet) would be eliminated. No need to mark these places as they are already noted as such on the lake maps.

Is this really what you call a compromise? This whole thread should be renamed "opposers other thread". We have a small group of people here who "don't even own a go-fast boat" yet have dedicated their every waking hour of the past year complaining about a speed limit that is "doing absolutely nothing" and "doesn't even affect them" because the limit "is higher than their boats can go anyway", plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters. And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"?
It's kind of like having all the teams in the NFL that did not make the playoffs discussing a "compromise" that will put them in the playoffs even though they stink.
Things are working just fine right now. Let's not muck it up with a reversal disguised as a "compromise". The speed limit was already written as a compromise; one lake in the whole state, and as fast as 45 miles per hour, which over 95% of the lake's boats can't even reach. No horsepower, size, or weight limitations. How can people really sincere about safety and sharing not be happy with this law and recognize what a perfect compromise it already is?
Now, I'm sure that my post will be called "trolling" because I will not agree that the SL isn't working, but isn't it really the only post in this thread that is really recognizing what a "compromise" is?

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by elchase

Is this really what you call a compromise? This whole thread should be renamed "opposers other thread". We have a small group of people here who "don't even own a go-fast boat" yet have dedicated their every waking hour of the past year complaining about a speed limit that is "doing absolutely nothing" and "doesn't even affect them" because the limit "is higher than their boats can go anyway", plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters. And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"?
It's kind of like having all the teams in the NFL that did not make the playoffs discussing a "compromise" that will put them in the playoffs even though they stink.
Things are working just fine right now. Let's not muck it up with a reversal disguised as a "compromise". The speed limit was already written as a compromise; one lake in the whole state, and as fast as 45 miles per hour, which over 95% of the lake's boats can't even reach. No horsepower, size, or weight limitations. How can people really sincere about safety and sharing not be happy with this law and recognize what a perfect compromise it already is?
Now, I'm sure that my post will be called "trolling" because I will not agree that the SL isn't working, but isn't it really the only post in this thread that is really recognizing what a "compromise" is?

No arguements, just discussion.


1. What are you basing your 95% of boats cant pass 45mph on this lake. I could be incorrect and please correct me if you have Registration stats or the like, but I would think it is closer to 50% of the boats can exceed 45mph. My old 20 foot cuddy would do 50mph with a little V6. Also it seems that Performance Boats on Winni make up more than 5% of the boats?


2. I have asked numerous times on this thread what harm am I causing going 60mph over 500' away versus 45mph?


Thanks

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by elchase

Is this really what you call a compromise? This whole thread should be renamed "opposers other thread". We have a small group of people here who "don't even own a go-fast boat" yet have dedicated their every waking hour of the past year complaining about a speed limit that is "doing absolutely nothing" and "doesn't even affect them" because the limit "is higher than their boats can go anyway", plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters. And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"?
It's kind of like having all the teams in the NFL that did not make the playoffs discussing a "compromise" that will put them in the playoffs even though they stink.
Things are working just fine right now. Let's not muck it up with a reversal disguised as a "compromise". The speed limit was already written as a compromise; one lake in the whole state, and as fast as 45 miles per hour, which over 95% of the lake's boats can't even reach. No horsepower, size, or weight limitations. How can people really sincere about safety and sharing not be happy with this law and recognize what a perfect compromise it already is?
Now, I'm sure that my post will be called "trolling" because I will not agree that the SL isn't working, but isn't it really the only post in this thread that is really recognizing what a "compromise" is?

EL, while your opinion is your opinion, all of your posts are not geared towards discussing a compromise rather then shooting down any idea other then what is on the books. We all know you do not want anything changed so there is really nothing more for you to point out.

It would be appreciated that if you do not want discuss or negotiate as we have now done for the past 36 hours in a very cival and just manner, please take your posts to the supporters thread becasue clearly you are in support of what is on the books and nothing else. I would ask the webmaster to help with keeping the discussion going for the purpose of what the thread was intended. negotiation / compromising.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...I would ask the webmaster to help with keeping the discussion going for the purpose of what the thread was intended. negotiation / compromisomg..."

There's absolutely nothing that can replace a narrow discussion among those who engage in self-congratulations and self-admiration.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...there is really nothing more for you to point out..."

"In a room full of hob-nailed boots—those wearing sandals perceive discrimination..."
—Confucius

'
'
'
'
'


It may not have been Confucius that said that—I forget

[NoRegrets]

"...Things are working just fine right now. Let's not muck it up with a reversal disguised as a "compromise". The speed limit was already written as a compromise; one lake in the whole state, and as fast as 45 miles per hour, which over 95% of the lake's boats can't even reach...." elchase

What is your problem? I have a family cruiser that can destroy the night limit and can break the day limit. It really sucks that the limits eliminate a pleasure that some have invested in and gain pleasure from. Things are not fine as you mentioned. The law is not for safety as the SL group plays. Evidence of safe operations above the current temporary limit is easy to prove. I believe the SL is for control of the resource by a small group of "if I don't like it nobody else should be able to do it" people.

The suggestions by everyone in this thread have been towards a compromise in a reflective and jovial tone with only one noticable exception!

I have to say I am very impressed with BI in these sessions of discussions and thank all who contribute so much time in articulating their thoughts!

[VtSteve]

I do not think either side can effectively negotiate a compromise at this time. The supporters are trying to rush through the Legislature and make the bill permanent. The reasoning is that they do not feel there is sufficient data to defeat the sunset provision. I agree. I also agree that there is not enough data for anyone to determine anything, other than the lake being quieter this year.

For those that claimed it's quieter due to the law? I can only state this. Those on your side that are trying to change the status of the bill have stated themselves there is not enough data to support their claims. They disagree with El's broad statement about traffic being up, primarily because both the MP and their own group have stated that traffic on the lake, as well as registrations, slip rentals, and boat sales are all down.

In an attempt to prove something that is simply not true, people have made the claims that the lake is safer due to the law as it is.

In the spirit of common sense, I can only conclude two things here.

The sunset provision must be extended for further evaluation. You can tinker with the daytime speed limit if possible. But I would further assert that the MP has to take as proactive a role to study the situation further, and try to report their findings periodically. In any event, the safety wording of the current law should remain in tact.

There is only one group afraid of the sunset provision. They are the diehards. If they wish to prove their point at some time, it will have to be done with interviews, real life observations, and factual data. I would be perfectly willing to review the data, ALL of it, from 2008, 2009, AND 2010.

[Kracken]

Thanks OCDACTIVE,

And until your boat is fixed you are welcome to take a ride in mine.

It's not the antarctic blue sports wagon with a C.B. radio and "The Rally Fun-Pack”. It is the a pea green Wagon Queen Family Truckster. You think you hate it now, but wait till you drive it to Shibley’s.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Kracken

Thanks OCDACTIVE,



It's not the antarctic blue sports wagon with a C.B. radio and "The Rally Fun-Pack”. It is the a pea green Wagon Queen Family Truckster. You think you hate it now, but wait till you drive it

I am not your everyday fool... I don't want to drive it, I just want my old car back..............

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Kracken

Thanks OCDACTIVE,

And until your boat is fixed you are welcome to take a ride in mine.

It's not the antarctic blue sports wagon with a C.B. radio and "The Rally Fun-Pack”. It is the a pea green Wagon Queen Family Truckster. You think you hate it now, but wait till you drive it to Shibley’s.

Very funny.. Thank you.. I do have two other boats... a party boat (yup thats right I drive a tri-toon as well!!!!!, and a small center consol fishing boat... So before people jump on me for thinking I only enjoy the lake going fast.........think again..

But thank you I do appreciate the offer.. I will be up the weekend of the 29th for my son's 2nd bday, but other then that I am now back to working weekends to save for the rebuild and paint job.. So no more lake for me

If I end up down your way I will definately drop you a line.

[Kracken]

Originally Posted by elchase

Is this really what you call a compromise? This whole thread should be renamed "opposers other thread". We have a small group of people here who "don't even own a go-fast boat" yet have dedicated their every waking hour of the past year complaining about a speed limit that is "doing absolutely nothing" and "doesn't even affect them" because the limit "is higher than their boats can go anyway", plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters. And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"??

Elchase,

I am not sure if you were referring to me but it certainly seems that way. No I don’t own a go-fast boat but I do oppose the speed limit.

Why?

When you take the rights and liberties away from one group it diminishes us all.

No the speed limit does not effect me personally. I have never been in a go-fast never mind driven one. I was not the target of this law…this time. But what is next?

Cruisers, bass boats, ski-boats, PWC????

How about this one…

The lake belongs to us all. What happens if the next issue addressed in Concord is access to the lake? The majority of people in this state don’t own waterfront property. This isn’t fair to people who don’t own property. If everybody has equal rights to the lake why should they be limited to just the public beaches? Why can’t everyone enjoy the entire lake and all of the lake’s shoreline? What if the next legislation makes all shorefront public property?

I guess some people believe it is perfectly fine for rights and liberties to be taken away for individuals as long as it’s not your group. The problem is, if you let that happen, someday they will come for you too.

The funny thing about this Elchase, In spite of your arrogance and insults… I would still support you if you are in the next targeted group.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Kracken

No the speed limit does not effect me personally. I have never been in a go-fast never mind driven one.

Kracken.... again as I have mentioned to other posters, I would be happy to fix this part of your post..

She will be back on the lake next May..

I love going to Shibleys on the Lake for Lunch... Come on out for a blast...

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Kracken.... again as I have mentioned to other posters, I would be happy to fix this part of your post..

She will be back on the lake next May..

I love going to Shibleys on the Lake for Lunch... Come on out for a blast...

OCD.... if you keep this up you may end up with a line at your dock!!!!!.....

All in all though.... I applaud your efforts and especially your willingness to take people out and let them experience, the fun you enjoy.....

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

OCD.... if you keep this up you may end up with a line at your dock!!!!!.....

All in all though.... I applaud your efforts and especially your willingness to take people out and let them experience, the fun you enjoy.....

More the merrier......... Just may hurt on the gas $ side..

[Woodsy]

For the record...

I could certainly live with a 65MPH daytime limit... that being said, another one of my reasons (not espoused in my recent novella) for eliminating the daytime 45 MPH limit is that with a 65MPH limit, there are maybe 30-40 boats on the lake that can top that and the number rapidly decreases as spped goes up... maybe 6 boats can top 80, maybe 3 of those 6 can top 90, maybe 1 or 2 could top 100... Is it really worth having a law and more importantly spending the time, money and resources to enforce the law for these 20 or 30 boats?? Especially given the limited resources of the NHMP and the COMPLETE LACK OF DATA that suggests speed is an issue during the daylight hours. I say look at the economics and the data!

Woodsy

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

For the record...I could certainly live with a 65MPH daytime limit..."

OK:

Supporters give you 65-MPH.

Opponents give us 5-dB reduction in exhaust noise.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

OK:

Supporters give you 65-MPH.

Opponents give us 5-dB reduction in exhaust noise.

I'd be more than happy with 65 or so. And I'd love to not listen to the loud noise as well. I almost ordered a Baja 278 but was turned off by the exhaust offerings. They assured me it "could" be done differently.

I think the 525's and up need more than prop exhaust systems, but don't know. I have no desire to have expensive rebuilds, like trannys every 200 hours, engines sooner. Not for me. Saw a beautiful old Formula 280 today, great boat for me. Quiet as well

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

A 100HP lake is unlikely but not impossible. A few years ago a lot of people said a speed limit was impossible. The entire lake has been made "no wake" a few times. And if you will remember it worked. There were very few violations. And although it was a pain getting to and from the island at that time, the lake was a beautiful, tranquil thing to experience during those times. Don't be to quick to say what is impossible. A HP limit is coming.

Could be, but it's hard to do given even the old fashioned makeup of the lake.

What you've been describing BI is the Bonehead atmosphere, the Cowboys are Boneheads as well. You admitted speed wasn't the big deal. So what's the problem with dealing with those you say are cowboys? Do the MP's have any stones at all?

So now you have the SL. Are the cowboys all gone? How about the everyday, garden variety of Bonehead that infests all lakes? You may not be throwing up your hand and quitting, but you're sure taking the hardest approach.

[Irrigation Guy]

Speed is not the issue, its lack of consideration for others, and the safe passage rule.

Case in point, I was in my pontoon boat today, goes pretty slow(20 max) and was cruising along, up behind me comes a 24 foot boat bow high and getting closer(we were passing between lil bear and m'neck in a narrow section of the lake), this moroon was so close behind me I could have hit him with my coke can. I looked over my shoulder and pulled to the side letting this guy by(my wife terrified with sleeping baby in her arms), upon passing a gave a yell asking if he was a moron(obvious, but wanted him to know I was mad).

He passes me, and pulls up ahead less than a half mile, stops off loads his tube and passenger and starts tubing. I guess i was slowing him down by what 30 seconds?

We need the MP to concentrate on the most basic rule to make us all safe, the safe passage rule!

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

A 100HP lake is unlikely but not impossible. A few years ago a lot of people said a speed limit was impossible. The entire lake has been made "no wake" a few times. And if you will remember it worked. There were very few violations. And although it was a pain getting to and from the island at that time, the lake was a beautiful, tranquil thing to experience during those times. Don't be to quick to say what is impossible. A HP limit is coming.

Originally Posted by LocalRealtor

Speed is not the issue, its lack of consideration for others, and the safe passage rule.

Case in point, I was in my pontoon boat today, goes pretty slow(20 max) and was cruising along, up behind me comes a 24 foot boat bow high and getting closer(we were passing between lil bear and m'neck in a narrow section of the lake), this moroon was so close behind me I could have hit him with my coke can. I looked over my shoulder and pulled to the side letting this guy by(my wife terrified with sleeping baby in her arms), upon passing a gave a yell asking if he was a moron(obvious, but wanted him to know I was mad).

He passes me, and pulls up ahead less than a half mile, stops off loads his tube and passenger and starts tubing. I guess i was slowing him down by what 30 seconds?

We need the MP to concentrate on the most basic rule to make us all safe, the safe passage rule!

The MP is apparently useless trying to even be near these idiots. If they were all tied up tracking down 100 mph drunk drivers I'd cut them some slack, but that's obviously not the case. All Winni has is people like ElChase having tantrums over the go fasts. Would have made a nice video, but I can see you guys had your hands full

Boating really does suck at times, and those that cry the loudest to the legislature can't do anything about it. I'm sure El had a most pleasant, peaceful day on the lake

Didn't mean to quote BI in this one. But after seeing it, it just made me realize how utterly silly his HP statement is. For god's sake people, get a clue.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Could be, but it's hard to do given even the old fashioned makeup of the lake.

What you've been describing BI is the Bonehead atmosphere, the Cowboys are Boneheads as well. You admitted speed wasn't the big deal. So what's the problem with dealing with those you say are cowboys? Do the MP's have any stones at all?

So now you have the SL. Are the cowboys all gone? How about the everyday, garden variety of Bonehead that infests all lakes? You may not be throwing up your hand and quitting, but you're sure taking the hardest approach.

In my opinion the speed limit is working.

At least my approach has a chance of doing some good. Looking for more enforcement and education to turn things around is not going to happen. They are "pie in the sky" nice ideas. The Marine Patrol are facing budget cuts, not increases.

I know you will say they are wasting dollars chasing speeders. However there have been no speeding tickets written so that can't be true.

What we need to do is rigidly enforce the laws we have now.

[VtSteve]

What we need to do is rigidly enforce the laws we have now.

As we've always said. They can't enforce the obvious, so give them an even harder law to enforce, while ignoring the obvious.

You won't know if the speed limit has worked at all until around the summer of 2011. I say, let's wait until then. The SL supporters know it's crap, so they want to make it permanent, just because. What the heck, go for it.

Let's stake out the camps and see how those 25 mph Cowboys are doing.

Amazing that all those Safety people never helped the MP get additional funding. Heck, most of them hate the term Boneheads. Good luck BI, you'll need it.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I'm sure El had a most pleasant, peaceful day on the lake :emb.

Thanks Steve, I had a great day on the lake. It was hot and sunny here and Winnipesaukee was very busy, but very civilized again. Hope you enjoyed the day up on your lake.
I just can't get over the difference a simple little law has made. You might not be able to see that from your vantage in VT, but having been out on Lake Winnipesaukee for well over 600 hours so far this spring/summer, I have witnessed the improvement first hand.
I did see one of those Capt Boneheads in a non-GFBL that you guys keep talking about. My son and I were drifting about 25 feet south of the lit buoy off Welch, casting worms at the buoy for bass. A larger boat was coming along south of us, heading east to west with a little hydroplane running next to him on his north side. The bigger boat was going to pass south of us about maybe 100 to 200 feet (who can tell the difference?), and the little boat was heading straight at us. It looked like a little 14-foot or so homemade thing with a 20HP Johnson on it. We could see the smiling driver looking right as us as he approached, so we never got scared, just confused and annoyed. I figured he had to change course a bit and expected that was going to cut just north of the buoy, which would still put him only 30 or 40 feet from us, but to our astonishment, he passes right between us and the buoy. Right over our lines, not more than 10 feet from us at no less than 25 miles an hour. We're holding out our arms in a "what the heck?" gesture, and he gives us a big smile and holds up his beer. I looked at my son and we both broke out laughing. This was stupid enough to be comical. I know people say "10 feet" when it was really 50, but this was 10 feet. I was close enough to the buoy to cast beyond it and this guy split the difference.
But then I realized that never once did I get scared. If the guy had hit us dead-on there certainly would have been some damage but that little thing would not have killed us. I compared this to how heart-stopping-scared I've felt in past situations where I've had big heavy cigarettes coming at me at 60 or 70 miles an hour, even when much further away. Usually you can only see the big hull and wonder whether the driver can see you or is even looking. While this guy was driving as bad, he simply was not putting us at the same risk. His boat was small, and it was only going 25 or so.
There are certainly Captain Boneheads driving craft of all sizes; little fishing boats, sailboats, cruisers, and GFBLs. And the SL certainly will not get them all off the lake or turn them into good boaters in all regards. But it is amazing how much less dangerous these Captain Boneheads in the smaller slower boats are than the Captain Boneheads driving 70 in big heavy boats. Its amazing how much less terrorizing boats are when they are heading at you at 25 mph than at 70.
You guys need to understand that laws like the SL are not caused by responsible drivers like you protest to be, but are caused by the idiots who have been terrorizing us because they drive like idiots, drive huge heavy boats, and drive them very fast in places where it is not "prudent" to do so. You guys had a good thing, and they ruined it for you...we didn't. Your anger should be directed at them, and not at those who simply want to recreate on the lake without undue fear or risk.
Focus your energies on saving the other lakes where you can still drive as fast as you want from SLs before you lose them too. Do this by going after the people who really cost you your freedom here...the Captain Boneheads who drive GFBLs. If you don't get them off Sunapee, Newfound, Champlain, and all the other still-unlimited lakes, then SLs are inevitable there too, and you will only have yourselves to blame for failing to recognize your true enemy while you still had time.

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Guy

Maybe the "Broads Free Zone" or "65 Zone" could look like this?

Rattlesnake Guy,
Is this really a compromise in your view? Have you thought this through? You want to banish 95% of the lake's boaters to 30% of the lake. Take away the 150-ft buffer around the shoreline and islands and you leave us 12% of the lake to boat on. Crowd us all into that 12% and we will all be within 150 feet of eachother, essentially having 0% of the lake to exceed headway speed on. Meanwhile, you and your small group get 70% of the lake to selfishly fly around as you please? Great "compromise".
The speed limit is working fine. The people who wanted the law are content with its results...how often does that happen? The people whose bad behavior the law was aimed at are behaving (for the most part)...how often does that happen? As I said above, focus your anger and energy at the GFBL-driving Captain Boneheads while you still have time to save the other lakes that let you drive as fast as you want before these jerks force society to seek SLs on those too. You know who these guys are. They are the ones bragging about flaunting the SL. They are the ones who think that laws don't apply to them. They are the ones who cost you your freedom.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by elchase

It looked like a little 14-foot or so homemade thing with a 20HP Johnson on it. We could see the smiling driver looking right as us as he approached, so we never got scared, just confused and annoyed. I figured he had to change course a bit and expected that was going to cut just north of the buoy, which would still put him only 30 or 40 feet from us, but to our astonishment, he passes right between us and the buoy. Right over our lines, not more than 10 feet from us at no less than 25 miles an hour. We're holding out our arms in a "what the heck?" gesture, and he gives us a big smile and holds up his beer. I looked at my son and we both broke out laughing. This was stupid enough to be comical. I know people say "10 feet" when it was really 50, but this was 10 feet. I was close enough to the buoy to cast beyond it and this guy split the difference.
But then I realized that never once did I get scared. If the guy had hit us dead-on there certainly would have been some damage but that little thing would not have killed us. I compared this to how heart-stopping-scared I've felt in past situations where I've had big heavy cigarettes coming at me at 60 or 70 miles an hour, even when much further away. Usually you can only see the big hull and wonder whether the driver can see you or is even looking. While this guy was driving as bad, he simply was not putting us at the same risk. His boat was small, and it was only going 25 or so.

Unless you were piloting the Sea Shepherd, a 14' 20 HP boat going 25MPH that strikes you certainly can kill you or injure you severely. It sounds like the only law this guy didn't break was the SL. But because of that, and the fact that it was not a GFBL, you are pretty much OK with it.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Originally Posted by elchase

Rattlesnake Guy,
Is this really a compromise in your view? Have you thought this through? You want to banish 95% of the lake's boaters to 30% of the lake. Take away the 150-ft buffer around the shoreline and islands and you leave us 12% of the lake to boat on. Crowd us all into that 12% and we will all be within 150 feet of eachother, essentially having 0% of the lake to exceed headway speed on. Meanwhile, you and your small group get 70% of the lake to selfishly fly around as you please? Great "compromise".

elchase,
I think one of us is confused.
Like others before, I am saying to have a no speed limit zone in the broads region. "Everyone" can go everywhere on the lake. Everyone can go 0 to 45 on 100 percent of the legal parts of the lake. You can go 0 to 65 or beyond on 22% of the lake. The part of the lake where the boats and people are the most visible and furthest apart. Yes, I do think it's a compromise. It's less than the fast boats would have without a speed limit and it's less than the SL proponents would have with a speed limit. Neither side would be "happy" but both could have some of what they want.

PS My boat only goes 45 behind my truck. The fast zone would be in front of my camp where my family swims and kayaks near the shore. I fear the boats going 30 within 150 feet a lot more than the ones going 60 a quarter mile out.

[NoRegrets]

Where was everyone? In my tenth season on the lake this was the first weekend that I was able to get out of Paugus Bay as if it were a weekday. High noon on Saturday we went by the Naswa and there were less than 10 boats there. We drove straight into the channel without waiting. This was the first time this has ever happened! On Sunday we went through around 1:30 and the Naswa was rocking but still had a few open slips and we were 4th in line to get through the channel.

There were still alot of family tubers out there but no where near the number of boats as past seasons.

elchase, what lake were you on this weekend? I was on Winnipesaukee.

The reduced traffic is great but the boneheads are still here. Does anyone know if the officials have a way to estimate the boat traffic? I think I remember an estimate of 10,000 boats per weekend from a few years ago.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

Where was everyone? In my tenth season on the lake this was the first weekend that I was able to get out of Paugus Bay as if it were a weekday. High noon on Saturday we went by the Naswa and there were less than 10 boats there. We drove straight into the channel without waiting. This was the first time this has ever happened! On Sunday we went through around 1:30 and the Naswa was rocking but still had a few open slips and we were 4th in line to get through the channel.

There were still alot of family tubers out there but no where near the number of boats as past seasons.

elchase, what lake were you on this weekend? I was on Winnipesaukee.

The reduced traffic is great but the boneheads are still here. Does anyone know if the officials have a way to estimate the boat traffic? I think I remember an estimate of 10,000 boats per weekend from a few years ago.

The SL law has pretty much gotten the GFBL Captain Boneheads off the water, didn't you know that? Hard to believe the traffic would be down this past weekend, quite possibly the best of the year. I cruised well out of my normal area way down south, maybe many explored the outer reaches of Winni. It was quite calm this weekend, so it was a great chance to do so.

[BroadHopper]

I stayed up around Moultoboro Bay area last weekend. The 'Walmart side of the lake' has been too congested for my taste in the past few years. I think the Boneheads are scared of rocks and pretty much stay on the other side of the graveyard.

My observation of the bay area is that boating activities are pretty much the same.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

I did see one of those Capt Boneheads in a non-GFBL that you guys keep talking about. My son and I were drifting about 25 feet south of the lit buoy off Welch, casting worms at the buoy for bass. A larger boat was coming along south of us, heading east to west with a little hydroplane running next to him on his north side. The bigger boat was going to pass south of us about maybe 100 to 200 feet (who can tell the difference?), and the little boat was heading straight at us. It looked like a little 14-foot or so homemade thing with a 20HP Johnson on it. We could see the smiling driver looking right as us as he approached, so we never got scared, just confused and annoyed. I figured he had to change course a bit and expected that was going to cut just north of the buoy, which would still put him only 30 or 40 feet from us, but to our astonishment, he passes right between us and the buoy. Right over our lines, not more than 10 feet from us at no less than 25 miles an hour. We're holding out our arms in a "what the heck?" gesture, and he gives us a big smile and holds up his beer. I looked at my son and we both broke out laughing. This was stupid enough to be comical. I know people say "10 feet" when it was really 50, but this was 10 feet. I was close enough to the buoy to cast beyond it and this guy split the difference.
But then I realized that never once did I get scared. If the guy had hit us dead-on there certainly would have been some damage but that little thing would not have killed us. I compared this to how heart-stopping-scared I've felt in past situations where I've had big heavy cigarettes coming at me at 60 or 70 miles an hour, even when much further away. Usually you can only see the big hull and wonder whether the driver can see you or is even looking. While this guy was driving as bad, he simply was not putting us at the same risk. His boat was small, and it was only going 25 or so.
There are certainly Captain Boneheads driving craft of all sizes; little fishing boats, sailboats, cruisers, and GFBLs. And the SL certainly will not get them all off the lake or turn them into good boaters in all regards. But it is amazing how much less dangerous these Captain Boneheads in the smaller slower boats are than the Captain Boneheads driving 70 in big heavy boats. Its amazing how much less terrorizing boats are when they are heading at you at 25 mph than at 70.
You guys need to understand that laws like the SL are not caused by responsible drivers like you protest to be, but are caused by the idiots who have been terrorizing us because they drive like idiots, drive huge heavy boats, and drive them very fast in places where it is not "prudent" to do so. You guys had a good thing, and they ruined it for you...we didn't. Your anger should be directed at them, and not at those who simply want to recreate on the lake without undue fear or risk.
Focus your energies on saving the other lakes where you can still drive as fast as you want from SLs before you lose them too. Do this by going after the people who really cost you your freedom here...the Captain Boneheads who drive GFBLs. If you don't get them off Sunapee, Newfound, Champlain, and all the other still-unlimited lakes, then SLs are inevitable there too, and you will only have yourselves to blame for failing to recognize your true enemy while you still had time.



The speed limit is working fine. The people who wanted the law are content with its results...how often does that happen? The people whose bad behavior the law was aimed at are behaving (for the most part)...how often does that happen? As I said above, focus your anger and energy at the GFBL-driving Captain Boneheads while you still have time to save the other lakes that let you drive as fast as you want before these jerks force society to seek SLs on those too. You know who these guys are. They are the ones bragging about flaunting the SL. They are the ones who think that laws don't apply to them. They are the ones who cost you your freedom.

I did another read of your post El, and it's quite possibly the worst statements, and certainly the most irresponsible I've ever read. But at least many can see in print exactly where you are coming from.

First, you're not afraid of this beer-drinking bonehead because his boat is small. You even slough it off and have a good laugh.

because......

All of your hatred and anger are focused on another group, specifically, the GFBL group of boaters. Only "they are the ones that think that laws don't apply to them", right El?

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't share this type of prejudice. Not on the water, not anywhere. It's not productive, not rational, and speaks at a level well below that of anyone I'd associate with. It's pretty much the essence of what sparks so much protest in the Winfabs movement.

You were dragged, kicking and screaming into a safety debate, and while only now you mention there are Boneheads that cause most of the problem, you you now say it's the GFBL "jerks" that are the reason the SL was passed, ignoring any and all evidence to the contrary. I knew you would see an opening to the debate, and you took it. But instead of getting all rational on us, you spout your anger toward a single, small group of boaters. You say nothing of enforcement, and even laugh off a very close encounter because the Bonehead's boat was small.

Being selfish and arrogant does nothing to promote safety, nor does it deal with any of the problems at hand. In the nature of moving forward and having discussions that actually deal with issues, I certainly don't want the "jerks" making up stuff as they go along to promote myopic agendas based on anger. There are plenty of good-natured people that seem to think a SL might work, or is necessary. They are open to discussion, and we all share a common hope of safety on the waters. You sir, are not one of these people. Whenever a group, no matter how small or large, focuses all of their energy behind feelings of anger, hate, or even rage, it never ends up well.

I find it hard to believe that someone that spends at least 6 hours a day, seven days a week, every week on the water can only find one particular group to focus such anger towards.

[chmeeee]

Originally Posted by elchase

Thanks Steve, I had a great day on the lake. It was hot and sunny here and Winnipesaukee was very busy, but very civilized again. Hope you enjoyed the day up on your lake.
I just can't get over the difference a simple little law has made. You might not be able to see that from your vantage in VT, but having been out on Lake Winnipesaukee for well over 600 hours so far this spring/summer, I have witnessed the improvement first hand.

Wow, 600 hours, that's pretty impressive. Almost like a full time job! Actually, it is a full time job, that would be 40 hours per week assuming you've been out since the beginning of May. Especially impressive given the almost non-stop rain through May, June, & July.

To be entirely honest, I feel like the percentage of GFBs has not changed at all. Sure, there are not as many of them this year, but there are not as many of every type of boat. I did in fact see the biggest GFB I've ever seen twice on Sunday. It was a 52 foot something or other with a closed cockpit. Interestingly, he was one of the more civil boaters I've seen on this lake. He came out of the Gilford Town Docks at headway speed all the way out past Locks Island before taking off. I saw him again later on idling through the Bear Island NWZ.



(Please excuse the low-res, long distance shot)

Interestingly, I did have the good fortune of meeting the biggest moron I've ever seen on the lake. Going through the Bear Island NWZ from north to south, I look back and see a 25 or so foot center console steaming towards me, bow high, max wake. He banked right about 75 feet behind me and passed by my starboard side about 20 feet off, still maximum wake (in the NWZ). I honked, he smiled and kept going towards Sheps, never slowing below 20 mph or so.

[VtSteve]

Those are the type of boaters that I usually "think" just don't understand that their actions may not be prudent. Not a dangerous Bonehead per se. Many boaters don't realize what their own wake does, both on shore and on the water. Granted, they have to contend with wakes as any boater does, so they Should know. I don't necessarily assume that everyone's a seasoned boater and understands all of their actions. Some are newbies, and operate as they would in a car.

I know most people are afraid to get involved in altercations, society being what it can be today. But a simple warning that he could have a seriously expensive ticket in a highly patrolled area may make him think you're just looking out for his wallet Regardless of whether they patrol it or not

[Bear Islander]

I just want to point out that this thread has degenerated into "just another speed limit argument". Is anybody really trying to float a compromise? The clock is ticking.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I just want to point out that this thread has degenerated into "just another speed limit argument". Is anybody really trying to float a compromise? The clock is ticking.

I just did in the post above yours.

[Dave R]

Hate to say this but... The 45 MPH daytime part of the speed limit is not as bad as I thought it would be.

I am against the speed limit in principle, because I feel speed is not an issue on the lake. What I have seen this year has made me realize that the speed limit is making MY boating more fun. I have found that the bays are a lot more civilized, due to less overtaking. This is especially true in Alton Bay, an area I frequent. I still overtake boats on Alton Bay, but I'm far less likely to be overtaken now. As the overtaker, I'm the give-way boat and I am more confident in my ability to be the give-way captain than I am relying on someone else to be. This is something I had not considered, and has actually encouraged me to operate my boat faster in bays than I ever used to. It's nice not seeng boats bearing down on me from behind as I prepare to alter course to overtake another boat. I imagine the boat I am overtaking has a very different perspective though...

I think no speed limit in the broads is a good idea, but I can live with 45, and here's why: All the intelligent boaters know that speed limit really does not matter in the broads. One can operate as fast as one wants to out there with no chance of ever being ticketed by following one simple rule of physics. This simple rule also happens to be a very safe rule to follow and will completely prevent collisions and fear. Frankly, I like the idea that only smart poeple can get away with speeding. If someone gets convicted (fairly) of speeding in the daytime, on this lake, they have to be pretty dumb and operating unsafely.

I think the 25 MPH night time limit is at least 5 MPH too slow. 30 is perfectly safe on nights with plenty off moonlight, or an hour or two after sunset.

I am still against the boating speed limit, but I would support a compromise that limited speeds in the bays and increased speed limits to at least 30 at night, lake-wide.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I'm just astounded at your "well over 600 hours" this year. In a year of pretty bad weather, that's an astounding accomplishment. (

Originally Posted by chmeeee

Wow, 600 hours, that's pretty impressive. Almost like a full time job! Actually, it is a full time job, that would be 40 hours per week assuming you've been out since the beginning of May.

You guys really like to give a hard time, eh? Is there a limit to how much time I can spend on the lake? Do I need your permission? I thought I could say (unlike many on the this forum) that my boating does not impact anyone but me, but I guess I am wrong. My boats are very quite, and although my power boat is pretty fast (goes about 45...a pretty fast speed for a boat), my speed has never put anyone else at risk of caused them fear, and I have never had a violation because I adhere to all of our laws, even those I disagree with. How could my boating possibly offend you? And I'm the "troll"?

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I just put about 8 hours on this weekend. That's a third of my entire summer hours now, a new low

Judging by your dedication to this forum (a whopping 20-some posts since Friday), I'm surprised you've been able to get that much boating time in. Do you have a satellite connection in the boat out in VT? You are the last person that should be challenging how someone occupies their time. Do you have any other interests besides posting from VT on a NH speed limit forum? ... about an activity you only do for 24 hours a year?

Originally Posted by chmeeee

I did in fact see the biggest GFB I've ever seen twice on Sunday. It was a 52 foot something or other with a closed cockpit.

That looks like the same boat I saw last week. And you don't think that looks silly on a crowded lake? Was he still wearing his Helmet and PFD? Did he still have his tail between his legs from last week's spanking? I'm surprised he came back, but not surprised he was now respecting the law. But I must say that helmet really was a laugh. Surpized he wasn't wearing an Evil Kneevil cape too.

Originally Posted by chmeeee

I look back and see a 25 or so foot center console steaming towards me, he banked right about 75 feet behind me and passed by my starboard side about 20 feet off, still maximum wake (in the NWZ). I honked, he smiled and kept going towards Sheps, never slowing below 20 mph or so.

I hear ya. This must have been annoying. Now take this boat and double it in length, triple it in weight, and quadruple it in speed and imagine how your annoyance woudl have changed to terror as he approached.

I wrote a very frank and sincere post about what you guys need to do to help save your pastime on the remaining lakes. You have jerks out there who do not belong in the "cock pits" of these huge boats, and they have cost you some of your freedoms already. Yet you continue to direct your anger at the "victims" rather than the "criminals". Challenging silly details of the posts of people who enjoy passive pastimes like fishing and sailing, and trying to scare them from voicing their opinions is not going to help you avoid seeing more speed limits enacted on the other lakes around the region. If you don't concentrate on removing the GFBL Boneheads from the remaining lakes and if the problems Winnipesaukee used to have persist on those lakes, then the people of those lakes are going to see how well the SL is working here and are going to want to copy it. Then you will have no place left without rules. Stop focusing on me and how many hours I get to spend in my boats and start directing your anger at the right group. Stop high-fiving the few law-breakers who are still speeding here and thinking that they are doing you some big favor. They are your worst enemies, yet you are too blind to see that. I write this in all sincerity.

I'm getting very frustrated and thinking that my time might be better spent than trying to debate with this group on this issue anymore. As they say; you can lead a horse to water, and I've really run into a bunch of non-thirsty horses. When people start threatening to "investigate" me and start ridiculing my amount of boating, then it is clear that logic is just being wasted and that this is not a worthwhile investment of time I'd rather be spending on the lake on such sunny days as this. You guys are clearly devoted to your cause and have decided that insulting and intimidating those who disagree is somehow going to get a wonderful law that the rest of society is enjoying to be repealed. Why should I try to steer you from that misguided tactic? It worked so well for you last time. If I promise to stay out of these threads, will you stop talking about me, ridiculing me, and leave me alone?

[pm203]

Originally Posted by elchase

. And you don't think that looks silly on a crowded lake? Was he still wearing his Helmet and PFD? Did he still have his tail between his legs from last week's spanking? I'm surprised he came back, but not surprised he was now respecting the law. But I must say that helmet really was a laugh. Surpized he wasn't wearing an Evil Kneevil cape too.

This boat and its owner were in no way reprimanded by the MP. The MP were in awe of the boat and wanted a closer look at it. Of course, the story gets twisted, but what else is new?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by pm203

This boat and its owner were in no way reprimanded by the MP. The MP were in awe of the boat and wanted a closer look at it. Of course, the story gets twisted, but what else is new?

Is that the boat that was going 90 and suddenly slowed down to 25 mph when he saw the MP boat?

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by elchase

You guys really like to give a hard time, eh? Is there a limit to how much time I can spend on the lake? Do I need your permission? I thought I could say (unlike many on the this forum) that my boating does not impact anyone but me, but I guess I am wrong. My boats are very quite, and although my power boat is pretty fast (goes about 45...a pretty fast speed for a boat), my speed has never put anyone else at risk of caused them fear, and I have never had a violation because I adhere to all of our laws, even those I disagree with. How could my boating possibly offend you? And I'm the "troll"?


Judging by your dedication to this forum (a whopping 20-some posts since Friday), I'm surprised you've been able to get that much boating time in. Do you have a satellite connection in the boat out in VT? You are the last person that should be challenging how someone occupies their time. Do you have any other interests besides posting from VT on a NH speed limit forum? ... about an activity you only do for 24 hours a year?

That looks like the same boat I saw last week. And you don't think that looks silly on a crowded lake? Was he still wearing his Helmet and PFD? Did he still have his tail between his legs from last week's spanking? I'm surprised he came back, but not surprised he was now respecting the law. But I must say that helmet really was a laugh. Surpized he wasn't wearing an Evil Kneevil cape too.

I hear ya. This must have been annoying. Now take this boat and double it in length, triple it in weight, and quadruple it in speed and imagine how your annoyance woudl have changed to terror as he approached.

I wrote a very frank and sincere post about what you guys need to do to help save your pastime on the remaining lakes. You have jerks out there who do not belong in the "cock pits" of these huge boats, and they have cost you some of your freedoms already. Yet you continue to direct your anger at the "victims" rather than the "criminals". Challenging silly details of the posts of people who enjoy passive pastimes like fishing and sailing, and trying to scare them from voicing their opinions is not going to help you avoid seeing more speed limits enacted on the other lakes around the region. If you don't concentrate on removing the GFBL Boneheads from the remaining lakes and if the problems Winnipesaukee used to have persist on those lakes, then the people of those lakes are going to see how well the SL is working here and are going to want to copy it. Then you will have no place left without rules. Stop focusing on me and how many hours I get to spend in my boats and start directing your anger at the right group. Stop high-fiving the few law-breakers who are still speeding here and thinking that they are doing you some big favor. They are your worst enemies, yet you are too blind to see that. I write this in all sincerity.

I'm getting very frustrated and thinking that my time might be better spent than trying to debate with this group on this issue anymore. As they say; you can lead a horse to water, and I've really run into a bunch of non-thirsty horses. When people start threatening to "investigate" me and start ridiculing my amount of boating, then it is clear that logic is just being wasted and that this is not a worthwhile investment of time I'd rather be spending on the lake on such sunny days as this. You guys are clearly devoted to your cause and have decided that insulting and intimidating those who disagree is somehow going to get a wonderful law that the rest of society is enjoying to be repealed. Why should I try to steer you from that misguided tactic? It worked so well for you last time. If I promise to stay out of these threads, will you stop talking about me, ridiculing me, and leave me alone?

When you make unrealistic claims of 600 hours on the lake and a 14 foot boat going 25mph could not kill you if struck, what do you expect?

[tis]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

In my opinion the speed limit is working.



I know you will say they are wasting dollars chasing speeders. However there have been no speeding tickets written so that can't be true.

If there have been no tickets, then there isn't a need for the law. I think that proves it. If all these people were speeding, surely they would have caught someone! I am sure there have been tickets for the others offenses, showing there is a need for some of those laws.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by tis

If there have been no tickets, then there isn't a need for the law. I think that proves it. If all these people were speeding, surely they would have caught someone! I am sure there have been tickets for the others offenses, showing there is a need for some of those laws.

That's not true. Anyone can see that people have slowed down...just sit on the dock and watch. People used to blow by here at 70 MPH, now they don't. Everyone around here at least is commenting on how the noise problem is so much improved as well. Speed limit not working? Ridiculous.

[BroadHopper]

OK so the SL is working. Everyone is slowing down.

But the Boneheads are worst than ever. They know that valuable MP resources are tied up on radar training and buying radars. So they are having a field day!

I have slowed down a bit. Not because of the SL. Because of the gas prices and economy.

Last Tuesday night, when I was showing guests the Bahre estate, I notice a storm coming the NW. I took a full throttle return home to Lakeport across the Broads. Damn right I was speeding. I'm not going to be caught in a thuderstorm. Ironically, there were several boats doing the same thing. Including a MP RIB. I'm surprise he didn't pull anyone over.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

OK so the SL is working. Everyone is slowing down.

But the Boneheads are worst than ever. They know that valuable MP resources are tied up on radar training and buying radars. So they are having a field day!

I have slowed down a bit. Not because of the SL. Because of the gas prices and economy.

Last Tuesday night, when I was showing guests the Bahre estate, I notice a storm coming the NW. I took a full throttle return home to Lakeport across the Broads. Damn right I was speeding. I'm not going to be caught in a thuderstorm. Ironically, there were several boats doing the same thing. Including a MP RIB. I'm surprise he didn't pull anyone over.

Thank You for acknowledging the SL is working.

I think speeding to get home just before or during a thunderstorm is an unwritten exception to the rules. In fact its not all that unwritten. The concept of "force majeure" says you can break the law in extreme circumstances. Like robbing a bank when someone is holding a gun on your family. Dozens of boats go through the Bear Island NWZ full speed just before and during a bad storm. And I have seen the MP watch them and do nothing. I have done it myself with no feeling of guilt.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

Thanks Steve, I had a great day on the lake. It was hot and sunny here and Winnipesaukee was very busy, but very civilized again. Hope you enjoyed the day up on your lake.
I just can't get over the difference a simple little law has made. You might not be able to see that from your vantage in VT, but having been out on Lake Winnipesaukee for well over 600 hours so far this spring/summer, I have witnessed the improvement first hand.

Glad everything's working out for you El. I'm just astounded at your "well over 600 hours" this year. In a year of pretty bad weather, that's an astounding accomplishment. I just put about 8 hours on this weekend. That's a third of my entire summer hours now, a new low

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thank You for acknowledging the SL is working.

I think speeding to get home just before or during a thunderstorm is an unwritten exception to the rules. In fact its not all that unwritten. The concept of "force majeure" says you can break the law in extreme circumstances. Like robbing a bank when someone is holding a gun on your family. Dozens of boats go through the Bear Island NWZ full speed just before and during a bad storm. And I have seen the MP watch them and do nothing. I have done it myself with no feeling of guilt.

I agree with you here BI. But if the the bill makes 45 statutary then that means the above unwritten law is no longer true. Keeping it arbitrary and 'reasonable and prudent' fits in very well.

That being said. The current law can be pretty vague when it comes to court play. The judge has a pretty grey area to play with.

I wonder how ELChase will feel if we full throttle through Meredith Bay to escape a thunderstorm. 'Not in my backyard!'

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I wonder how ELChase will feel if we full throttle through Meredith Bay to escape a thunderstorm. 'Not in my backyard!'

I'd have no problem with people running for safety in my backyard and have never indicated otherwise, but your post is obviously not about my tolerance, it is saying "Although you've never told us, we have been investigating and know where you live". Not much of an investigation since my address is listed with my phone number next to my name...alphabetically...Nice detective work. This also explains some of the weird hang-ups we've been getting.
Is this what happens to people who do not agree with you? Do you think it helps your cause to intimidate those who don't carry your water, scare them off the forum, then say "Look, everyone who is still posting here opposes the speed limit, therefore it should be repealed."? You guys are no different on the forum than you are on the lake ..."Get out or our way"...You are nothing but a bunch of bullies, then you cry that you are being "discriminated against". Disliking bullies is not a hate crime.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Kracken

"...When you take the rights and liberties away from one group it diminishes us all..."

One of Our Founders, Ben Franklin, referred to "essential" liberties in his famous quote.

Your "right" to endanger others with speed is not an "essential" liberty.

Originally Posted by Kracken

"...I was not the target of this law…this time. But what is next...Cruisers, bass boats, ski-boats, PWC...????"

When a cruiser's wake is caught on a webcam overturning kids in a canoe...and several drown...?

Do you deny that a headline—past or present—has NOT driven our lawmakers?

Originally Posted by Kracken

"...How about this one...The lake belongs to us all. What happens if the next issue addressed in Concord is access to the lake? The majority of people in this state don’t own waterfront property. This isn’t fair to people who don’t own property. If everybody has equal rights to the lake why should they be limited to just the public beaches? Why can’t everyone enjoy the entire lake and all of the lake’s shoreline? What if the next legislation makes all shorefront public property?

An unlikely scenario: Concord is using shoreline owners' "redistributed wealth" to support the operations of the entire state.

[LakeSnake]

Originally Posted by elchase

Is this really what you call a compromise? This whole thread should be renamed "opposers other thread". We have a small group of people here who "don't even own a go-fast boat" yet have dedicated their every waking hour of the past year complaining about a speed limit that is "doing absolutely nothing" and "doesn't even affect them" because the limit "is higher than their boats can go anyway", plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters. And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"?
It's kind of like having all the teams in the NFL that did not make the playoffs discussing a "compromise" that will put them in the playoffs even though they stink.
Things are working just fine right now. Let's not muck it up with a reversal disguised as a "compromise". The speed limit was already written as a compromise; one lake in the whole state, and as fast as 45 miles per hour, which over 95% of the lake's boats can't even reach. No horsepower, size, or weight limitations. How can people really sincere about safety and sharing not be happy with this law and recognize what a perfect compromise it already is?
Now, I'm sure that my post will be called "trolling" because I will not agree that the SL isn't working, but isn't it really the only post in this thread that is really recognizing what a "compromise" is?

Yes elchase that is a compromise. Just as kracken pointed out (as well as others) the current SL has compromised my freedom to use the lake as a public waterway in the fashion I see fit- as long as I do not jeopardize anyone else's rights/freedom and most importantly safety.
The current SL law compromise (as you like to call it) is not and does not have to be the only "right" one.
I do not oppose a speed limit (as shown by willingness to offer potential solutions that will satisfy both sides agenda's).
Do I currently own a GFBL - No - but I have in the past - one that could easily exceed the current limit. I have also had access to and driven a boat that could easily do twice the current limit.
I had that freedom in the past - now it is gone.
I have never had or been close to any collisions nor have I ever received any tickets for any reason in 30 years of boating on Winni.

It's all about the boat driver having the skill to drive the boat and the common sense to drive it in a reasonable and safe manner given the current conditions - within the limits of the law.

So do I really think we should have a speed limit - NO I don't - but I am willing to compromise so that others may enjoy the lake in the manner they see fit - without lessening my (or anyone else’s) freedoms.

After all this was the Live Free or Die state - I fear that has been taken away along with the common sense of Capt B. Which unfortunately necessitates this lengthy and arduous debate.

[chmeeee]

Originally Posted by elchase

Is this really what you call a compromise? This whole thread should be renamed "opposers other thread". We have a small group of people here who "don't even own a go-fast boat" yet have dedicated their every waking hour of the past year complaining about a speed limit that is "doing absolutely nothing" and "doesn't even affect them" because the limit "is higher than their boats can go anyway", plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters. And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"

I'm not sure that you entirely understand what a compromise is. If we start off, there are two ends of the extreme right here right now. There are some that want no speed limit law whatsoever. There are some that support the law exactly as it stands. Given that I have seen nobody that is actually interested in making the law even stricter, I will take those as the two extremes.

A compromise then would be something in between the law as it stands and nothing at all. What you support is the law as it stands, which is by definition not a compromise.

I don't know if by putting "don't own a go-fast boat" in quotes you are implying that you think people are lying, but I certainly am not. I own a 21' bowrider that can handle an absolute max of 52-54 mph, and the only way that ever happens is with a light passenger load and glass smooth water, otherwise known as almost never. Most of the time my comfortable max speed is 45 mph or less depending on chop.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by elchase

And this is supposed to be some sort of "all-inclusive compromise committee"?

Good point. One thing to be added here. We can all brainstorm as to what "we all" could agree on as to what constitutes a compromise, i.e. 55 day, 30 night, 500' safe passage, and yackity yack yack all day but in reality we need to keep the following in mind. The state legislature and executive branch are far less conservative than was the case when HB 162 was rejected, and will become increasingly so in the future. Many of the supporters of HB 162 were voted out of office (most likely unrelated to HB 162). Many people (not on this forum) are very happy with the SL and are going to point out that in fact the whole lake's region did not disintegrate (as some on the forum predicted) because of the SL. Some feel that the SL didn't go far enough.
The real debate will be in Concord (against the backdrop of a very high profile boating trial that will have national exposure). Everyone on this thread can insist that this or that is the best "compromise" but it's not a whole lot more meaningful than if we all agreed that monkeys can fly. Just because the forum members (hardly a representative slice of the NH public) agree on something doesn't necessarily make it so. It just seems to be a whole lot of mental gymnastics. Some on this forum have suggested that SL supporters can't go back to the 60's, Golden Pond, etc. and yes of course we can't go back to these times. There are more boats, more faster boats, more kayaks, canoes etc. People change, times change, and laws change to reflect this. This is an expected consequence of how societies evolve and has been a part of man's history since the beginning...the "we don't need no more laws" crowd is being overly simplistic to believe this will change. Old laws will be discarded, and new ones adopted as we move into the future. (Sure glad we can shop on Sundays now!)

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Good point. One thing to be added here. We can all brainstorm as to what "we all" could agree on as to what constitutes a compromise, i.e. 55 day, 30 night, 500' safe passage, and yackity yack yack all day but in reality we need to keep the following in mind. The state legislature and executive branch are far less conservative than was the case when HB 162 was rejected, and will become increasingly so in the future. Many of the supporters of HB 162 were voted out of office (most likely unrelated to HB 162). Many people (not on this forum) are very happy with the SL and are going to point out that in fact the whole lake's region did not disintegrate (as some on the forum predicted) because of the SL. Some feel that the SL didn't go far enough.
The real debate will be in Concord (against the backdrop of a very high profile boating trial that will have national exposure). Everyone on this thread can insist that this or that is the best "compromise" but it's not a whole lot more meaningful than if we all agreed that monkeys can fly. Just because the forum members (hardly a representative slice of the NH public) agree on something doesn't necessarily make it so. It just seems to be a whole lot of mental gymnastics. Some on this forum have suggested that SL supporters can't go back to the 60's, Golden Pond, etc. and yes of course we can't go back to these times. There are more boats, more faster boats, more kayaks, canoes etc. People change, times change, and laws change to reflect this. This is an expected consequence of how societies evolve and has been a part of man's history since the beginning...the "we don't need no more laws" crowd is being overly simplistic to believe this will change. Old laws will be discarded, and new ones adopted as we move into the future. (Sure glad we can shop on Sundays now!)

I agree, but imagine if there was a Compromise or Possible Compromises and the people on this forum/the constituents called/emailed their elected officials and asked them to consider them..

This following part is not directed at you, just a general comment:

It is evident to me that the most of the SL Supporters are not interested in a Compromise at all, because they already have what they want, so why do they need to Compromise.

It is the people who oppose the SL that need to be loud and proud and discuss this matter and try to change the law.

I should add...I appreciate the pro SL Supporters that are willing to compromise. The ones that are not I understand your reasoning even if I dont agree with it...

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by elchase

... plus one member that claims to be a speed limit supporter but appears willing to say anything to gain the acceptance of the go-fasters ...

I must assume that you are talking about me.

You have only been on the forum a month and it appears you have not gone back and read the old SL threads. Otherwise you would know how ridiculous that statement is.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I must assume that you are talking about me.

You have only been on the forum a month and it appears you have not gone back and read the old SL threads. Otherwise you would know how ridiculous that statement is.

Looks like EL is taking on some serious water! I hope his sailboat makes it back to the dock!

[Kracken]

I agree with Sunset (to a point) & Onlywinni,

This thread was started to reach a common ground between opposers and supporters. If we can reach an accord here, then maybe a petition can be started with the support of this forum. To sit here and argue about the merits of changing the law then do nothing is truly an act of futility.

BI has graciously thrown his opinion and possible support for a compromise. I do hope others will join in as well. I think there may be a member or two willing to bring a petition or resolution to Concord if we can work together. Maybe it well help sway the legislature, maybe not, but it can't hurt. I do think this forum is a good representation of the people of NH as it pertains to this legislation. To many of the people of this state, this law is a waste of time. They don't live here and they don't visit here. This legislation directly affects us. So I believe our opinions do matter.

As for the people who believe unlimited speed or 45/25 is FIRM. I am guessing a compromise will not be supported by them. They have the right to their opinion.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You have only been on the forum a month

This is up for debate as well.

[Kracken]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

This is up for debate as well.

Coke just came out my nose...no so good for the sinuses

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

This is up for debate as well.

So you're thinking what I'm thinking? It seems odd that one would be so rabid and passionate after just "one month" on the board. Me thinks I smell a rat. I wish Don were able to flush this one out.

[Kracken]

"A STAR is born"

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Kracken

"A STAR is born"

Or perhaps we should call someone about getting these copyrighted or even patented

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Or perhaps we should call someone about getting these copyrighted or even patented

Not sure we could do that, there was already a movie made called Sybill!(for those that don't know, this is a movie about a women with a split personality)

[Kracken]

I actually just saw a picture of the STAR of that movie...

[OCDACTIVE]

I am not going to quote the HUGE post above by EL for as everyone can see it has no basis for this discussion. Trying to pick apart peoples threads to prove a point wasn't this threads intention. We have made some real progress and as long as it doesn't turn into a mud slinging match we can continue our work and maybe get something hammered out. El is simply trying to get everyone off topic and the thread shut down. Please don't let that happen and just stay on the discussion at hand. Everyone has tried to be nice and try to reason in a subjective fashion. Some are not willing to partake in a compromise so maybe they should go back to the thread they trumpeted as a place where they will not be attacked or argued with.

Here we are actually trying to get something accomplished.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

So you're thinking what I'm thinking? It seems odd that one would be so rabid and passionate after just "one month" on the board. Me thinks I smell a rat. I wish Don were able to flush this one out.

Yup... thats what I am thinking.. Plus the language and verbage is VERY similar to that of other names that have tried this in the past.

It raises an eyebrow that someone stays side lined for sooo long then suddenly when the bill comes back up suddenly a new member is as gun-ho as they are, and are so versitile in posting multiple threads.. Looks to be A LOT of experience...

as mentioned: if it looks like and smells like........................... IT IS!

[gtagrip]

I was thinking the same thing at one point, then was going on a benefit of doubt. Not so sure anymore. The rhetoric did seem distinctively similar. Thought we might have had a copy cat on our hands!

[LIforrelaxin]

Well it looks like we all may be of the opinion that what we think is a ........ is probably indeed a........

Anyways.....

Now some people talk about what ideas we generate here being of no real value.... because we aren't the ones make the decision... well let me put this out there....

If we had a couple of SL supporters, and a couple of opposers, and a couple of people like me that just want to have a good comprimise, that can prove through this forum, that we can discuss this matter with out mud slingingy and being nasty....

Then the next step needs to happen, that group needs to get together and talk and come up with an effective comprimise.... that group could then go to the state house and seek and audiance with some of the representatives to discuss the matter....

We live in a Democracy People, it is not only our right, but our obligation to be involved in the government.... however we can't just be opposers or supporters and walk into the state offices and make a difference, however if you have some people from both side that are willing to put forth a comprimise then you have something you can go to the state house and put forth.....

Anyways I will get off my soap box........

[chase1]

What is the point of discussing a compromise at this point?

The MP spent last season enforcing specific speed zones to test and evaluate the effect and enforceability of the proposed speed limit. They also went one step further and collected boat speed data throughout other areas of the lake that were not indicated to the public. After all this there was still insufficient data to support the law because it was then amended and passed with a 2 yr sunset clause so that more data could be collected.

A petition is being submitted in Concord to repeal the current sunset clause and make the law permanent. I would think amendments would be left out of the discussion in Concord and the debate would be focused simply on weather to repeal the sunset or not. There doesn't seem to be any new data that indicates a need to rush it to permanent status, and there was certainly plenty of time and debate that lead up to the current sunset clause. No one can claim they will be safer next year either way so what reason could there be to rush the process. Let the law ride as written and evaluate it after one more season. A compromise can be discussed then if the data warrants it, but I say if after three years there is still insufficient data to support the law, stop the debate and watch the sun set.

Chase1

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

it appears you have not gone back and read the old SL threads.

I have been looking at the history. Aren't you the same person that was laughing at the same group you are now pandering to, telling them they could use their cigarette boats as planters once the SL passed? Aren't you the one recently talking about how the fat lady had sung and they should just accept that they "had lost and should go home"? And I'm the crazy one? As an alleged supporter, you have appeared so pompous as to make supporters look like jerks and I have wondered whether you have really been an opposer all along just posing for that reason. Senator Spector comes to mind.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

As for my credibility, I would never defend it to you. Yours though? Let's just say the research has begun.

Like Joe the Plumber? Should I be scared and drop off the forum to avoid being "researched"? WHAT THE HECK IS THIS IMPLYING?

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

EL, As other have pointed out here you are loosing your logic......onlywinni, is not saying his boat isn't safe below 25 mph.....

He wasn't???;

Originally Posted by onlywinni

Thanks for confirming my point that I can not operate my boat at less than 25mph safely.

Originally Posted by onlywinni

So I said I cant operate my boat safely at less than 25mph and the Boattest.com tests confirms that.

I think his statement, repeated three times, is very clear. He wants us to let him tool around our crowded lake as fast as he can in a 5000 pound boat because he can't operate it safely at speeds below "only" 25 mph. No word recalibration needed.

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

what he is indicating is that at 25 mph he is comfortably on plane, and feels he has good control of the boat with a quick nimble response that feels in control... as he back down from there the boats starts to back down off the plane and he gets into a region where the boat is bow high (reduced visibility) and probably sluggish to the response... until he backs far enough out of the throttle that the boat settles down in the water.....

You got all that from "I cant operate my boat safely at less than 25mph"? Wow. And I'm the one with the credibility problem?

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

when you blurt out what comes to your mind to support that goal you loose your credibility.....

I agree.

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

I will say it agian... this is a dam big lake, room for everyone......

Not if we have multi-ton craft running around on it going speeds at which the craft "cant be operated safely" according to their operators, there isn't. No lake is big enough for that.

Originally Posted by onlywinni

What are you basing your 95% of boats cant pass 45mph on this lake.

This number was generated by your side...when they thought it would help them. They claimed to have done a survey. They wanted to show that the number of high-speed boats was trivial, so it suited them to "prove" that only 5% of the boats on the lake could reach the limit and to ask "why enact a law that will effect so few"?. Now you see the mistake of this logic and want to discredit your own findings?

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by elchase

You got all that from "I cant operate my boat safely at less than 25mph"? Wow. And I'm the one with the credibility problem?

OK normally I don't let myself get upset at what some says in here.... but EL... you are barking at the wrong person....

My statement was extrapulated from various post made by Onlywinni, and from my own experience handling many many pleasure boats..... Why is it your the only one that seems to have a problem with this statement here????