Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Today's Posts

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-01-2010, 11:04 AM   #1
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,585
Thanks: 1,618
Thanked 1,638 Times in 842 Posts
Default C'mon APS- Parsi strikes again!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acres per Second View Post

However, in reluctant agreement, VitaBene stated of the 2009 season, "the lake was saner". The price of gasoline may be the reason the 2008 season appeared unusually quiet, but much less-so, the two seasons of the official speed limits—2009/2010.
In typical APS fashion and using your famous Parsi you jump to conclusions. I would not call my statement "reluctant". A year and a few months later, I have to say I still agree with myself! Here is my post from 8/2009 in its entirety:

"Elchase, there is no question that the lake is saner this year. Unfortunately, a great many, myself included, believe that the real reason is the poor economy. We have all seen many boats that have never even been uncovered for the season- the owners just decided to leave them winterized. I think when the economy improves, we will see a return of most of the craziness.

I do disagree with your point about last summer- gas on the lake was pushing or exceeded $5/gallon, virtually everyone became more thrifty and boated less- I believe there was even a poll regarding it.

Many of us who are percieved as anti-speed limit don't even own or want to own boats that can break it (I almost got lapped by a pontoon boat a few weeks ago!). Most of us own and use canoes and sailboats (Lazer in our case). When not sailing, my 14 year old son and his 11 year old sister can often be found in his 12 foot skiff with an 8 horse Merc patrolling the Greens Basin end of the lake. I have a vested interest in keeping the lake as safe as possible.

The real us versus them needs to become the safe boater versus the bonehead boater, not slow versus fast. The answer is to rid the lake of bad boaters. There is no way that many boaters on the lake studied for and passed their boating certificate course. Even though my son is not old enough to take his safety course, I had him study and pass the practice test prior to allowing him to boat alone.

I was sincere in my comment about sharing the lake- I want to do so with good boaters, slow and fast. I want to eradicate bad boaters, slow and fast.

I apologize if I misread your original post and hope you enjoy the fabulous weather we are supposed to have today."
VitaBene is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 11:51 AM   #2
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
Default

To all the nay sayers.... REALLY!?! You can't be serious....

I'm curious as to why there is such an outcry over this. The whole point of the boater education course is to educate people of ALL ages. I fail to understand why being educated is a bad thing? I'm trying to distill what possible harmful affects the boater education class may have and at the moment I see no down side at all. Matter of fact I see a whole lot of benefit from this as most kids probably don't fully comprehend the responsibilty of operating a boat no matter the size or HP. They may not also know the basic rules of the road or understand what manditory equipment they should have on board when out on the water.

No I see this as a few people getting thier panties in a bunch all because SBONH happens to endorse the idea and has nothing to do with the public benefit that could result.
MAXUM is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (12-01-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 01:55 PM   #3
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
To all the nay sayers.... REALLY!?! You can't be serious....

I'm curious as to why there is such an outcry over this. The whole point of the boater education course is to educate people of ALL ages. I fail to understand why being educated is a bad thing? I'm trying to distill what possible harmful affects the boater education class may have and at the moment I see no down side at all. Matter of fact I see a whole lot of benefit from this as most kids probably don't fully comprehend the responsibilty of operating a boat no matter the size or HP. They may not also know the basic rules of the road or understand what manditory equipment they should have on board when out on the water.

No I see this as a few people getting thier panties in a bunch all because SBONH happens to endorse the idea and has nothing to do with the public benefit that could result.
I don't think you understanding what is going on. Nobody is arguing against the boater education part of this bill. I think that everybody should be able to take the course and receive a certificate.

This legislation would also take the privilege of operating a boat away from everyone under the age of 12.

And this not only applies to Winni but all over New Hampshire.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 02:32 PM   #4
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
This legislation would also take the privilege of operating a boat away from everyone under the age of 12.

And this not only applies to Winni but all over New Hampshire.
Without a certified adult onboard, and only for motorized vessels. Look at the overall maturity level of say the average 12< year old today. Better yet let me put it to you this way, as a parent myself there is no way I would ever let my kid go out on the lake unsupervised or without an expereinced boater period. Why you may ask, because I feel it's my responsibility to ensure not only my kid's well being, but the general public as well no matter how much I think my kid may know what they are doing. What scares me is the parent that thinks this is OK to do, bringing into question thier own lack of prudent judgement which inherently will be reflected in thier children's lackthereof. Is a law necessary to "fix" this, well that I can't answer. If it is in fact a problem that needs to be addressed legislativly fine, but only as a last resort. I'm simply stating that I don't find this idea offensive at face value. What I do find offensive is that people are to stupid to police themselves so laws like this end up being proposed and sometimes adopted or being opposed to an idea not on the merits, but who's idea it is.
MAXUM is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 02:43 PM   #5
AllAbourdon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 61
Thanks: 22
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

It is important to note that as BI mentioned, this is all over NH, not just on Winnipesaukee.

There are different safety risks depending on the body of water. That should be taken into consideration when a law like this goes into effect.
AllAbourdon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 12-01-2010, 03:11 PM   #6
jrc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
Default

Sorry APS, someone mentioned that you posted at odd hours, I post at odd hours when I travel, I remembered your affection for middle east training centers, so I put a guess together. I guess I was wrong?

In short, more training is always good, all boaters should be trained at somepoint. Restricting lake access to a class of people just because some of them are not mature enough to use it safety is a bad idea. Obviously parent need to be resposible for the children and be responsible if they make a mistake.
jrc is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 03:50 PM   #7
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

It seems to be pretty standard everywhere, including those wonderful states with speed limits.

Massachusetts:
Who May Operate a Motorboat: The restrictions below apply to boats propelled by any type of motor, whether or not the motor is the principal source of propulsion.

Persons under 12 years of age may operate a motorboat on Massachusetts waters only if accompanied on board and directly supervised by a competent person 18 years of age or older.
Persons 12 through 15 years of age may operate a motorboat on Massachusetts waters only if they:
Have passed an approved boating education course or …
Are accompanied on board and directly supervised by a competent person 18 years of age or older.
Persons 16 years of age or older may operate a motorboat on Massachusetts waters without age restrictions.



Vermont

Age Restrictions:

Persons less than 16 years of age shall not operate a Personal Watercraft.

Persons less than 12 years of age are restricted to motorboats of 6 hp or less.

Anyone born after January 1, 1974 must successfully complete an approved boating safety course prior to operating any motorized vessel. This online Basic Boating Safety Course meets this requirement.



I personally prefer the 6 HP limit. My first little boat had a 5 hp outboard. It was still very powerful and fast for a boat
VtSteve is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to VtSteve For This Useful Post:
Ryan (12-01-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 04:19 PM   #8
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
Vermont

Age Restrictions:
Persons less than 12 years of age are restricted to motorboats of 6 hp or less.


This I like! I think the state should compromise on this point and allow an under 6hp rule to exist.
hazelnut is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
AllAbourdon (12-02-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 05:39 PM   #9
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
Default

Hazelnut and VtSteve - At last we agree!

6 HP is ok by me.
Bear Islander is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (12-01-2010), VtSteve (12-01-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 06:32 PM   #10
RANGER CANOE CO
Senior Member
 
RANGER CANOE CO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Squam
Posts: 52
Thanks: 25
Thanked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Plus..... 1
__________________
rangercanoe.com On Squam lake
RANGER CANOE CO is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 10:25 PM   #11
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

First, since I haven't looked at outboards in many years, I think it's prudent to see what small outboards are sold now. I'd hate to pass a law that had a meaningless HP rating. Let's say under 10 hp for now.

The outboard guys can look it up.

Sounds like a deal
VtSteve is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 02:40 PM   #12
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
Default

I took a brief look at just about every manufacturer I could think of and all make several models in the 4-6 HP range, most are long shafts for use on the back of sailboats, the next jump is typically to 9.9 HP.

Honestly after reading the suggestion of capping this at 10HP it seems like a very reasonable compromise.
MAXUM is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 03:14 PM   #13
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Thanks for the lookup Maxum.

I'm sure, as Scott says, this may be a simple thing to change when they get it into that position. It's not the end of the world, amendments happen all the time. And, as Scott says, this was not an SBONH proposal, so the parties that did draft it are responsible for it.

This was one of the best, and most civil discussions of lake laws yet. It's nice to be around a group that has respect for one another isn't it?
VtSteve is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 04:02 PM   #14
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
Default

I agree, matter of fact a little disagreement fuels great debate. In discussing possible pending legislation like this having a few ideas thrown out on the table for everyone to weigh in on **in a responsible fashion** in theory should result in something that meets the stated objective without being to far over reaching. Trouble today is that there are to many who are not mature enough to leave the personal axe in the closet and be able to look at things objectively. For those that can't participate like that are well known and have lost any and all credibility.

All that said I hope that our newly elected leaders in Concord set thier priorities appropriately, our state faces some very serious problems least of them being amendments to current boating laws.
MAXUM is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 05:00 AM   #15
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,938
Thanks: 2,205
Thanked 776 Times in 553 Posts
Question Little Kid + Aluminum Boat + Propeller = ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Hazelnut and VtSteve - At last we agree! 6 HP is ok by me.
With the right loading, 6-HP can send a boat to 26-MPH.

(But watch for a new SBONH Press Release anyway).
ApS is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.60461 seconds