Boating Classes

[Onshore]

It has repeated been pointed out that the boating certificate only certifies that you know the rules; you don't actually have to know how to drive a boat. Is there any place locally that actually offers piloting lessons? Is there any incentive for taking such a course? Perhaps a break on your insurance? We are actually getting requests these days for bigger stronger docks where the applicants say the need for the stronger dock is that inexperienced boaters (or older relatives with slower reflexes) continuously damage the regulaur existing structures because they don't know how to dock and run into them. This is a rather disturbing bit of reasoning and it would be great if we could refer people to some form of boat piloting class so that their docks will survive a bit longer because the Department is not going to start accepting boater inability as justification for "beefier" docks.

[jrc]

So you are saying that the Department will deny docking improvements for elderly boaters and instead tell them to take boating classes?

[Onshore]

No, we have allowed modifications for elderly boaters before but typically it is for maintenance reasons. Plus frankly, most of the older boaters are experienced and tend seek reconfigurations allowing better more forgiving approach angles. It's their kids that ask for the sturdier docks. That said, when it gets to the point that your only justification for needing a piling or crib dock is that someone keeps running into it with the boat, perhaps it is time to sit down and discuss whether or not this person ought to be docking the boat any more. I don't say this flippantly as this is a conversation that my family has had to have; it is not an easy thing to do.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by jrc

So you are saying that the Department will deny docking improvements for elderly boaters and instead tell them to take boating classes?

Seems reasonable. It's like driving a car, and if a persons motor skills have degraded to the effect that they cannot perform basic maneuvers safely, then they probably need to stop operating.

It's not like we're talking about docks made out of balsa wood and elmers glue here. Most of the docks I've come across on the lake are engineered to handle a decent load, plus some extra beefiness for the occasional mishap. If an individual is continuously damaging the docks, the problem does not lie with the dock...

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by shore things

It has repeated been pointed out that the boating certificate only certifies that you know the rules; you don't actually have to know how to drive a boat. Is there any place locally that actually offers piloting lessons? Is there any incentive for taking such a course? Perhaps a break on your insurance? We are actually getting requests these days for bigger stronger docks where the applicants say the need for the stronger dock is that inexperienced boaters (or older relatives with slower reflexes) continuously damage the regulaur existing structures because they don't know how to dock and run into them. This is a rather disturbing bit of reasoning and it would be great if we could refer people to some form of boat piloting class so that their docks will survive a bit longer because the Department is not going to start accepting boater inability as justification for "beefier" docks.

I agree, it is a "disturbing bit of reasoning". Are the docks that feeble, or is the damage getting to be unavoidable due to poor seamanship?

Regardless, I think Weirs Beach Boater was posting about such a boating class in a thread this summer. I've always thought it was a great idea to have on-water instruction, just as Driver's Ed is mandatory. Or, we could just ignore the number of boaters with little to no skill, and build stronger docks and put rubber bumpers on rocks, and inflatable bubbles around all boats.

Yes, JRC, if people really are doing that much damage to docks, what the heck would you do? I wouldn't accept "boater inability" as a reason either. Boating classes make far more sense that the silly little certificate. Of all the information packed into that little whiz quiz, about 95% is ignored on the water anyway.

[jrc]

What we are really talking about is that people want to build sturdy permanent crib or piling docks, like people have been building on Winni for centuries.

The department has decided that in most cases only temporary docks are permitted. While these are suited for protected locations and small boats, they can be too fragile for docking large boats in rough water.

People have the right to build a dock that suits their needs, they shouldn't have to fight with bureaucrats who say learn to dock better.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by shore things

"...it would be great if we could refer people to some form of boat piloting class so that their docks will survive a bit longer because the Department is not going to start accepting boater inability as justification for "beefier" docks..."

I don't know why the Department "ever-started" with that kind of justification: I think you may have been "fibbed" to.

A weak dock will save a boat from damage, a strong dock could create a boating hazard . You could allow them a choice of presently "allowed-strength" or the option of "Industrial-strength".

"Industrial-strength" would have to be built like a brick...um...outhouse, and cost a zillion dollars. Then disallow any request for "Industrial-strength", 'cause they're fibbing to you about their requirements.

JMHO.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

NH Big Lake Boating, Offers personalized boat handling, their instructors will work with you one on one to help you sharpen your on the water skills. Also I think JP Boating still offers this service as well. You can find both online, NH Big Lake Boating is on Facebook, or biglakeboating@aol.com or Janis, JPBoating.com Hope this helps.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by jrc

What we are really talking about is that people want to build sturdy permanent crib or piling docks, like people have been building on Winni for centuries.

I apologize, in your original email I thought you were talking about improvements to various public/semi-public docks. But, it appears you're talking about people wanting to reinforce their own private docks.

While I still feel you should not need to build some hurricane-proof structure that could accommodate the Sophie B just to slip your 28' cruiser, many of the private docks I've seen on the lake DO seem a little on the flimsy side. Homeowners should, IMO, be able to build a moderately substantial dock structure without the need for tons of red tape. Sinking a few 8" or 10" pilings doesn't seem like cause for concern. Dredging up the bottom or dropping in a 4' diameter pile group DOES seem like too much (not implying that you necessarily suggested one or the other in your post).

[GsChinadoll]

Isn't this what this organization http://www.facebook.com/pages/Meredi...16017365104656
is about? Are these instructors working yet? Is there a fee schedule and are there any of the experienced boaters on this site available to instuct?
People have to learn somewhere or else you have a bunch of people learning as they go and aggravating all of you that already know what you are doing.
Our family does not own a boat, although I wish we could afford to, but when we have rented in the past we always invited a friend that has years of experience boating to drive. My husband took the safe boating course ten years ago and he never felt comfortable enough to go it alone. Just saying this a service that is needed.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Yes, they are up and running. Instructors in place, but always looking for a few more qualified people. Looking for one in the Sunapee area, also Newfound Lake. Winnipesaukee, Winnisquam and Squam are covered at this time. Fees are not yet posted, and do vary depending on location, and time on the water. Also offer flexible rates for families or multiple operators in one company. Anyone interested please call 603-998-3598

Footnote: I do work with these fine folks, in the interest of full disclosure.

[VtSteve]

Thanks for pointing that out Brk, I apparently misunderstood Shore Thing's comments on dock requests as well. I "assumed" the discussion was about public docks. If I assumed incorrectly, then my entire focus is wrong. (and then I'll be on JRC's side immediately


The vast majority of the docks where I boat here are fairly new floating docks. My entire marina installed all new floating docks a few years ago, and they are left in year-round. Frankly, they're the best docks I've ever been around. At my marina, they set them out early April, which takes a couple of hours. These docks have everything from PWC's and dinghies to a 50' cruiser and large sailboats. No dredging, no pylons, and very limited maintenance. The nice part about the newer ones is that you walk on them solidly, not teetering sideways as with the old style.

[jrc]

I assumed Shore Things is talking about giving permits for land owners to construct dock on their own shorefront.

I didn't mean to address updating public facilities for the elderly or the inexperienced. Obviously we've seen good and bad solutions to that issue.

BTW I'm all for better skilled boaters and any training a boater takes to get better is a great idea.

I only meant to address the inherent sillyness of permitting process. Can you imagine that in this country a land owner must stoop to begging a goverment agent to allow them to install a dock strong enough for their family to use?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by jrc

I assumed Shore Things is talking about giving permits for land owners to construct dock on their own shorefront.

I didn't mean to address updating public facilities for the elderly or the inexperienced. Obviously we've seen good and bad solutions to that issue.

BTW I'm all for better skilled boaters and any training a boater takes to get better is a great idea.

I only meant to address the inherent sillyness of permitting process. Can you imagine that in this country a land owner must stoop to begging a goverment agent to allow them to install a dock strong enough for their family to use?

I agree 150% with you JRC. Shore Things, you g otttttaaa beeee kiddddding me!!!!!

I still understand where you're coming from, and people are pretty silly for using their poor boating skills as justification. I'm here to question their need for justification. So yes, I'm questioning your need.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by shore things

"...We are actually getting requests these days for bigger stronger docks where the applicants say the need for the stronger dock is that inexperienced boaters...continuously damage the regular existing structures because they don't know how to dock and run into them..."

What kind of dock are applicants requesting that can't be damaged by a boater?

[Onshore]

I should probably clarify a couple of side points that have come up.

If an owner has a seasonal dock, such as a pipe dock, and wants to replace it with a sturdier form of season dock in the same size and footprint, then they can absolutely can do so without a permit. The Department has no interest. Please take photos of the old dock before removing it so that if and when someone reports a new illegal pier the complaint can be closed out as quickly as possible.

If an owner wants to replace a seasonal dock with a permanent one then we are obligated to request the need because we are obligated to justify issuing a permit for what amounts to the private taking of public lands. Part of our charge is to keep as much of the public trust available to the full public for as much time as possible. This means consideration to winter use and safety as well as summer use. People tend to assume that we regulate permanent structures for some environmental reason because we are an environmental agency, but in truth it is predominantly about balancing the public trust vs private property rights. When I had stated that "the Department is not going to start accepting boater inability as justification for "beefier" docks", I was specifically speaking to those cases where the justification given for needing a permanent pier (ie piling or crib construction) was that it was needed to absorb impact when docking. This in and of itself is not an acceptable justification for a permanent pier at a private residence. When it comes to commercial and other public facilities there are other considerations that come into play such as the abilty to bear weight associated with loading or unloading passengers and supplies, the number of craft using the pier, torque on long piers, and similar issues. The fact is that inexperienced boaters have less impact on these docks since they will typically hit another boat first and that boat will serve the same fuction as a bumper.

All of these things aside, it would be really nice if whenever we have people say to us that their boating skills are not very good, we could provide them with information on where they might learn to be better boaters.

[Chimi]

Originally Posted by shore things

If an owner wants to replace a seasonal dock with a permanent one then we are obligated to request the need because we are obligated to justify issuing a permit for what amounts to the private taking of public lands.

Thanks for the info Shore. I mean no disrespect, but it would be nice if the opposite were true as well. The Shoreland Protection regulations virtually amount to the public taking of private lands (for which said land owner still has to pay taxes).

[Onshore]

Chimi - No offense taken.

[jrc]

I'm all for balancing the public trust vs private property rights, but no one denies that the landowner has riparian rights to wharf out into the water. Those riparian rights don't disappear in cold weather, so why does his dock have to? So the only argument is how that wharf is constructed.

Sorry about the sidetrack, yes, boater training is a good idea.

[Onshore]

This side track could be a whole other thread... I'm sorry that I can't make Forum fest yet again this year (working Timberman) because it really wouldn't be a bad to be able to sit down and bat the issues around a bit.

Does the riparian owner have a reasonable right to maintain a dock within the public trust during the winter, after ice-in? If during the boating season the site conditions are such that only permanent structures would safely secure watercraft, then yes. There are certain boating needs and the owner can't reasonably be expected to remove and re-install pilings annually if a piling pier is what the owner needs during the boating season. If a seasonal pier would suffice to hold their boat during the boating season, then it would seem unreasonable to impact the public use of the area by maintaining a structure in the public trust after ice-in.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by jrc

"...I only meant to address the inherent silliness of permitting process. Can you imagine that in this country a land owner must stoop to begging a goverment agent to allow them to install a dock strong enough for their family to use...?"

I dunno...

I didn't need a permit to install a 175-foot dock at my Florida lakefront—and neither did my neighbor—when he built his dock 30-feet longer than mine!

[VtSteve]

I think one problem inherent in many town's regulations for shoreline building is that they tend to over react based when seeing the worst case scenario, but tailor the regulations so that 80% of structures become problematic. Whereas a 175' dock may not pose a problem to anyone if it is used for access over shallow waters, it may indeed pose a problem in a navigable channel in deeper waters.

From Shore Things:

There are certain boating needs and the owner can't reasonably be expected to remove and re-install pilings annually if a piling pier is what the owner needs during the boating season. If a seasonal pier would suffice to hold their boat during the boating season, then it would seem unreasonable to impact the public use of the area by maintaining a structure in the public trust after ice-in.

Many, many times a newer floating dock would be a much better solution for the owner. We have several of the new ones at our marina in deeper water that is always in the target of waves. However, one must look at the phrase "unreasonable to impact the public use".

I think Shore Things should describe some scenarios where this "impact" would be real before trying to make a comment.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by shore things

"...Does the riparian owner have a reasonable right to maintain a dock within the public trust during the winter, after ice-in? If during the boating season the site conditions are such that only permanent structures would safely secure watercraft, then yes. There are certain boating needs and the owner can't reasonably be expected to remove and re-install pilings annually if a piling pier is what the owner needs during the boating season. If a seasonal pier would suffice to hold their boat during the boating season, then it would seem unreasonable to impact the public use of the area by maintaining a structure in the public trust after ice-in.

Piling docks still expose a boater to Hazard: I found large pieces of somebody's docking light at the end of my dock one morning. This is a docking light:


Starting at dawn, I probably spend more time on the dock than in boats, so I appreciate the "sturdiness" of a piling dock; however, a piling dock is subject to winter-ice damage.

Replacement pilings aren't the answer: driving a replacement piling into a "disturbed" lake bed allows ice to "lift-out" pilings and cause them to sink or float away.

1) Today, two "replacement pilings" lie in sight on the bottom. (One is mine, another is a neighbor's).
2) The top half (6-feet) of one of my "tie-off pilings" disappeared in Spring two years ago.
3) Through a new thread, I reported a "tie-off piling" adrift on strong Winnipesaukee winds this Spring. Oops—I see that thread disappeared between Space and Time.

Anyway, it turned out to be a neighbor's which had become a dreaded deadhead——a hazard to navigation...hence, my prior emphasis of "Rule 5".

Though I've managed to personally repair every piling that ice has damaged, ice damage needing repairs has happened nearly every other winter.

Circulators are necessary, expensive to operate, pose a electrical shock hazard, create an open-water/thin-ice hazard to all persons using the shoreline, enable ducks around all winter, allow muddy runoff directly to the shore's edge, require an unsightly sign, and disturb the immediate underwater environment.

(Possibly reducing lake-water temperatures all year ).

If I had it to do over again, I'd request a minimum number of pilings driven above the reach of winter ice. (Only four pilings need driving for a 40-foot dock).

At that point—perhaps 20-feet out—I'd hinge an aluminum dock which could be raised before "Ice-In". Fewer decking sections would need moving each season. (The raised portion of a "Hybrid Dock" could be folded back on the dock, or kept in a raised position, which would expose much less surface to winter winds.)

A "Hybrid Dock", as described, would be unaffected by ice damage, pose less hazard to snowmobiles, "accidental skimming", and not require any circulators—or the hazards and expenses associated with them.

As an alternative to aluminum, one could attach a large plastic floating dock, similar to this docking system I posted as a new thread this past winter:



If complainants can damage that dock, we definitely have a problem!

[jrc]

At the risk of beating a sidetracked dead horse, I think Shore Things and I agree on a lot but we have different definitions of the word "right".

So if a land owner has riparian rights to "wharf out into the water", then he has that right. The goverment should not make make him explain how he wants to use the right and argue with them about whether or not that's a good use. You don't need permission to use a right.

Sure the gov can tax a right through permit fees and property taxes. I can limit the scope (size) of a right, to prevent interfering with abutters and general navigation. Through building codes it can limit a right to protect the public safety.

But the removable dock rule goes beyond that, it says we don't think you need a permanent dock. Prove you need one. Prove you need to use your right.

[Onshore]

We might not even differ much on the definition of "right". The issues occur in finding the balance between the rights of the public and private land owner.

[NoBozo]

Lot's of talk lately about weather "Behind The Wheel Testing/Training" would help with "Boating Safety" ....OR Whatever...on the lake. I have ALWAYS believed that ...You Can't Fix Stupid". I think Woodsy said that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Driver's ed crash stats stump lawmakers
Updated: Monday, 23 Aug 2010, 9:25 AM EDT
Published : Monday, 23 Aug 2010, 9:25 AM EDT

STAFF REPORTS
INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) - Indiana lawmakers say they are puzzled by a study that shows teenagers who take driver's education classes are more likely to crash than those who do not take the classes.

The Indiana BMV released the study that it says shows current drivers under 18 who took driver's ed had nearly four times the crashes than those without the training.

Some lawmakers say it might be time for an overhaul. The state's drivers ed program has not changed in the past 30 years.

But the BMV says the numbers might be skewed by the fact that teens with driver's ed get their permits earlier and have more time on the road.

----------------------------------------------------------
Yea Yea Yea.....I would suggest that teenagers just mirror their ADULT Parents To The TEE. NB

[CaptJP]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

NH Big Lake Boating, Offers personalized boat handling, their instructors will work with you one on one to help you sharpen your on the water skills. Also I think JP Boating still offers this service as well. You can find both online, NH Big Lake Boating is on Facebook, or biglakeboating@aol.com or Janis, JPBoating.com Hope this helps.

Yes, I still do boating lessons for those who'd like to learn. I've gone really low key on this and nixed my advertising since my day job has taken up too much of my time. Sorry to say I've increased my rate for anyone that doesn't come to me by way of referral. I've actually referred some people to callacaptain.com at the seacoast. Many will travel to the lake. I'm keeping my focus on people who are fully committed to learning - thus making it worth the sacrifice of my time that could be out on my own boat. I just don't have enough of that any more.

Most folks only have one lesson with me (2-3 hours). I give them "homework" to practice on their own afterward. Practice makes a good boater, not one or two lessons. (But that helps of course!)

You'll notice that my web site is focused on weddings on the lake for couples who want to elope. (jpboating.com) Entertaining is far different than teaching!

[fatlazyless]

Hey, here's something somewhat interesting, and probably relevant to this thread?

Not having anything better to do, I was window shopping at the Laconia Saint Vincent De Paul store earlier today and found for just one dollar a NH Marine Patrol 84 minute vcr cassette & a 64 large page course on responsible boating. It is titled Boat New Hampshire - A Course on Responsible Boating, sponsored by New Hampshire Marine Patrol, NH Dept Safety, 2002 Edition. The original price tag says retail price $24.99 and I got it for just one dollar. It also has a 75 multiple choice question Exam A and a mail in, certification exam answer sheet.

Now that I said that, I'm trying to think of something intelligent to say as a follow up? Well, well, well, what a deep thought! Maybe I can find a local crafty person who could encase it in decorative glass, and craft it into a nice table lamp, or something?

Or, how about this? It could very well be used as a court room tool for inflicting corporal justice by a Belknap County judge who gets really steamed up over one particular defendant and wants to throw THE BOOK at them. Believe me, you get slapped across the face a good one with this 12"x6"x1" box & contents and you would definately feel it! It has some heft to it, just like a club!