|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Calendar | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
01-30-2008, 04:27 PM | #201 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Quote:
Bear Islander... Don't you think turn about should be fair play? I figure if you want to use boating accidents that occurred all over the country and apply them to laws that you think we should have here in NH, even though here in NH we have only had 1 fatal accident in the last 5 years. I figure I should be able to use that same argument to ban you from enjoying a personal liberty! I am not going to say your lying, but to be truthful, while you may meet Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic definition of Astronaut, your flight does NOT meet the definition of Astronaut according to the NASA website. The pilots of the rocket may meet the definition of astronaut, (see my paragraph below) however, you as $200,000 passenger/cargo do not. http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/astronaut_worldbook.html "The term astronaut also has a meaning that is not connected with NASA activities. In the 1960's, the United States Department of Defense AWARDED the rating of astronaut to military and civilian pilots who FLEW aircraft higher than 50 miles (80 kilometers). Seven test pilots received this rating for flights in the X-15 rocket plane. Flights of the X-15 ended in 1968." To think that because you can afford to to pay $200,000 you should be able to have the same title as Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Alan Shepard, etc is absolutely absurd! It is an absolute insult to those who EARNED thier right to call themselves ASTRONAUT by being the best of the best! Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
01-30-2008, 05:18 PM | #202 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
According to Websters I am an astronaut already.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/astronaut I wonder what Neil, Buzz and Alan think of Lisa Nowak being called an Astronaut. Anyway it's just a name. Doing it is what's important. |
01-30-2008, 08:29 PM | #203 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
BI,
If you want your $200,000 thrill to last a lot longer , go buy a nice performance boat and see what it's all about
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
01-30-2008, 08:54 PM | #204 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Burlington Ma / Laconia NH
Posts: 396
Thanks: 155
Thanked 201 Times in 97 Posts
|
Zoom,Zoom,Zoom
Quote:
The Breeze |
|
01-31-2008, 07:49 AM | #205 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
|
Quote:
I love that one,suicide is illegal everywhere.Guess what,going over headway within 150 ft is a violation already too!!! So what about you risking other peoples lives with your risky behavior?It looks like we should set limits on your activities so in the unlikely chance you get stranded,someone might die trying to rescue you.This big brother crap has to stop.
__________________
SIKSUKR |
|
Sponsored Links |
|
01-31-2008, 08:14 AM | #206 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
If a mountain climber in Antarctica needs rescue, it can only come from the other climbers that have already accepted that same risk. Part of that risk is that you may die rescuing others.
That has nothing whatsoever to do with enacting a boating speed limit on Winnipesaukee. I can understand you are frustrated by recent events, but equating apples and oranges is not the solution. And your example is more like apples and penguins. |
01-31-2008, 08:31 AM | #207 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Quote:
Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
01-31-2008, 09:09 AM | #208 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
I spent some time with a couple of your "real astronauts" last week during training and they were very gracious in using the term with reference to Virgin Galactic clients. |
|
01-31-2008, 09:28 AM | #209 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Quote:
Those Astronauts had better gracious in using the term used by Virgin Galactic.... they are being paid by Virgin Galactic! The reality is you are doing nothing more than buying a very expensive plane ticket to just beyond the edge of the atmosphere. I think its great that you means and the opportunity to do that, but to call yourself an Astronaut tarnishes the term. Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
01-31-2008, 10:30 AM | #210 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 498
Thanks: 62
Thanked 71 Times in 32 Posts
|
That's low
Quote:
"...received a BS degree in aerospace engineering from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1985. Nowak received a Master of Science degree in aeronautical engineering, and a degree in aeronautical and astronautical engineering in 1992 from the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California." "Nowak received her commission from the U.S. Navy in 1985, and became a naval flight officer in 1987. After her postgraduate studies, Nowak entered Aerospace Engineering Duty and the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School. She logged over 1,500 hours of flight in over 30 different aircraft during her career in the Navy, and obtained the rank of captain." "Nowak was selected to be an astronaut in 1996 and entered the NASA Astronaut Corps at Johnson Space Center in August of that year. She qualified as a mission specialist in robotics, and was assigned to mission STS-118. After schedule changes, she instead went into space on July 4, 2006 as a member of the STS-121 crew to the International Space Station. Nowak served as mission flight engineer, operated the shuttle's robotic arm during several spacewalks, and logged almost 13 days in space." It's highly likely that Neil, Buzz and Alan take no issue with her being called an astronaut based on her credentials...I doubt anyone here knows how her personal problems may have affected their opinion of what kind of astronaut she was or what kind of person she is. |
|
01-31-2008, 11:13 AM | #211 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
None of this has anything to do with speed limits. |
|
01-31-2008, 11:58 AM | #212 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Quote:
I can't believe you don't research before you post.... You are wrong yet again... well at least your wrong according to the Virgin Galactic website. http://www.virgingalactic.com/htmlsite/index.php http://www.virgingalactic.com/htmlsi...Picture&src=26 "Will I officially become an Astronaut? Yes. The term Astronaut is a derived from Greek words Ajstron ("star") and nautes ("sailor"). The criteria for determining who has achieved human spaceflight vary. In the United States, people who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) are designated as astronauts. The FAI defines spaceflight as over 100 km (62 miles).Virgin Galactic passengers will receive their Virgin Galactic astronaut wings and may recieve FAA astronaut wings as well." The key there is "may recieve". The FAA has only awarded 2 people with Commercial Astronaut Wings, and they were the pilots in command of the spacecraft. I highly doubt the FAA is going to award wings to hundreds of people just because they were wealthy enough to afford a $200,000 space ticket. Of course for $200K Virgin Galactic should give you a little gold trinket! Have fun with those Virgin Galactic Wings! Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
01-31-2008, 12:11 PM | #213 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
You can check the FAA site.
But I think yesterdays vote has more to do with your posts than anything else. |
01-31-2008, 12:39 PM | #214 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 176
Thanks: 19
Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts
|
The Bad 1%
You two sound like the 1% of the boaters that are causing 98% of the animosity toward the GFBL crowd. I hope you will be the first to be targeted once the speed limit goes into effect!
|
01-31-2008, 12:44 PM | #215 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Woodsy- You are correct! Declare victory if you like. |
|
01-31-2008, 06:31 PM | #216 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,896
Thanks: 469
Thanked 682 Times in 380 Posts
|
|
01-31-2008, 07:45 PM | #217 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Billerica, MA
Posts: 364
Thanks: 40
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
|
Bear Islander
Even though I'm not real happy with anyone associated with WinnFabs at the moment, I, for one, commend (and envy) your upcoming adventure on Virgin Galactic! IMHO, if mankind is ever going to spread beyond this planet, space travel will need to transition into the realm of a commercial venture. You and others like you with the bucks and guts to support the earliest steps in that direction will play an important role in that transition! Silver Duck |
04-03-2008, 03:07 PM | #218 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 146
Thanks: 46
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
|
Guns don't kill people - people kill people! And it's not the boat - it's the operator, plain and simple. Be it a 38' boat that can go 100mph or a 20' that can go 60mph, or a 13' Whaler that can go 25mph. All can be dangerous in the wrong hands - I am 100% opposed to the speed limit and 100% in favor of boater education and the use of COMMON SENSE! Come on people - think about it, rules in place or not - you shouldn't pass another boat (of any kind) at speed inside a safe distance - currently stated at a resonable 150'. As PM203 said - coming out of the channel I do the same thing as he does, get WELL clear of the NWZ and other boats and then get up and going. HeII - we are boating, where's the fire - what's the hurry - enjoy the lake, enjoy your boat and the people you are with and relax. And, at the end of the day - if I want to head out to the broads and rip it up for a quick blast at speed - so-be-it! I see FAR MORE bone-head moves over the course of a summer by people in "family" boats - bow-riders and cruisers - than I do in "performance boats". You can't judge a whole group (or a "cult" as APS referred to us as... ) by one individual who made a poor choice one night! (operator error - not the boats fault). Water on the water, beer on the pier - be smart, use your head and we'll all be better off for it.
|
04-04-2008, 09:05 AM | #219 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Nottingham NH
Posts: 13
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
common sense what a concept
Would'nt it be nice if we could teach COMMON SENSE. If everyone had common sense would we need any laws at all? I'am sorry but bone heads come in every size boat out there. But I would be more afraid of one going 100 mph than one going 25 mph. Can you tell me why anyone has to go that fast? I don't need a law to tell me not to drive drunk that is "COMMON SENSE" but hello lots of people drive drunk. So until everyone passes the common sense test i think we need some laws to help keep the bone heads in check. How can it hurt?
|
04-04-2008, 10:16 AM | #220 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
|
You need to reread your own post.You just said we you don't need a law to tell you not to drive drunk but lots do anyway and then imply that speed limits will stop fast boats.You just countered your own argument.
__________________
SIKSUKR |
04-04-2008, 11:10 AM | #221 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 146
Thanks: 46
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
04-08-2008, 09:32 AM | #222 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 2,160
Thanked 765 Times in 548 Posts
|
Nimby...
So, we get to re-visit this thread again... remember the original post?
Quote:
2) Another thought: some very vocal opponents to Winnipesaukee speed limits admit to living on different lakes! Yup. Let's keep the speedsters on The Big Lake—that'll work.
__________________
Is it "Common Sense" isn't. |
|
04-08-2008, 10:44 AM | #223 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,412
Thanks: 216
Thanked 782 Times in 464 Posts
|
Quote:
Then the scare tactics get spread, striking fear on the voters and representatives who have never been to or know nothing about the lake... |
|
04-08-2008, 11:20 AM | #224 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
04-08-2008, 03:02 PM | #225 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Nottingham NH
Posts: 13
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
The point is you can't teach common sense. So we do need laws. Of course laws are not 100 %. But something is better than nothing. Also no one has explained to me why anyone has to go 100mph on a small body of water. And yes at 100mph Winnipesaukee is very small. One great thing about N.H. is we have a coast line with a huge ocean GO FOR IT.
|
04-08-2008, 03:32 PM | #226 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
Quote:
There are 419 legislators in the list I just downloaded from the state website. Can you list the names of the ones familiar with the lake? The names of the "most" of that set that support speed limits? For what's its worth, 9 of the 13 legislators in a Winnipesaukee town did vote for the speed limit. But surely living in a Winnipesaukee town is not the same as being familiar with the lake. That definition leaves out Rep. Pilliod. |
|
04-08-2008, 07:33 PM | #227 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Any legislator that lives in a Winnipesaukee town meets my definition. Your 9 out of 13 is the proof you are asking me for. If you listened to the debate in the house you should know that quite a few legislators from around the state stood up and related there Winnipesaukee experience and their support of speed limits. One was an ex Marine Patrol Officer. The debates are on the internet, go listen to them and hear the "proof" with your own ears. I know a Senator that lives on Bear Island, does that count? |
|
04-08-2008, 08:55 PM | #228 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
I don't want to win any argument. You stated something as fact that really is just your opinion or at best a guess.
Yes, I know that you know a Senator that has a summer house on Bear Island. Surely you didn't base your "fact" only on input from this one person. |
04-08-2008, 09:29 PM | #229 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
You are claiming the legislature didn't know what it was doing when it passed HB847 because they are not familiar with the lake. The truth is the legislature spent a great deal of time on this legislation including many public hearings and debates. Just because you don't like what they did, does not mean they didn't know what they were doing. |
|
04-08-2008, 10:06 PM | #230 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
04-08-2008, 10:38 PM | #231 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
|
04-09-2008, 09:23 AM | #232 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 146
Thanks: 46
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
|
SS-194, just out of curiosity, do you have any (real) experience with "high-performance" boats!? How about anyone on this thread that is in favor of a speed limit!? Real experience, not from watching them on TV - maybe, have you ever piloted a boat above, say... 60 mph? How about 80mph? And how about that magic number of 100mph you keep referring to? Do you know anything about how they work, how they operate - what it takes to make them run... in a safe manner? Most people (99%) I have spoken with about this topic - that are in favor of a speed limit - have NO clue what a boat that will run at higher speeds is all about, aside from what they may have seen on TV one Saturday. They have never even been in a boat that will run anywhere near 80mph, let-alone 100mph. But they think they know what it's all about, "ohh - that boat looks really fast, it must be dangerous!". How about people discuss the FACTS from first-hand experience only! There are car accidents every day, there was a 16 yr old kid killed down here in Lexington the other night - he was in a MINI VAN that struck a tree! It was driven by another teenager - it was a result of operator error! Do we need to outlaw mini-vans from being on the road now 'cuz they get into accidents and kill people!? I know several people with Porsche's, Ferrari's and Lamborghini's with no accidents OR speeding tickets in them... Hmmm, dumb-luck or just responsible operators!?
Like Sgt. Friday used to say - "just the facts ma'am". I don't see how one groups speculation and desires should over-shadow another's, ESPECIALLY when there are no FACTS to support them! This is the Live Free or Die state, it is a free country last I checked and our freedoms should be held in the highest regard. We have laws on the lake today that aren't (or can't be due to lack of coverage) even enforced - 150' safe passage always comes to mind - how about we work on those first!? We can't teach common sense - I agree 100% - but we can teach people to be better and more safety-conscious boaters. |
04-11-2008, 07:24 AM | #233 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 2,160
Thanked 765 Times in 548 Posts
|
Quote:
Lakefront dwellers on Ossipee Lake and at least two Maine lakes are represented here opposing Winnipesaukee's speed limits. A case of NIMBY? Granted, I wouldn't want Lake Winnipesaukee's ex-cowboys near my guests and family either. Quote:
The floatplane I was in was flown by my Dad—a proven pilot. Moreover, both parents are certified floatplane pilots, and my Dad raced a "Laconia Speedster" on Winnipesaukee out of Melvin Village. Both are non-drinkers and want speed limits on Winnipesaukee. That includes my in-laws, who had a kayak incident with an all-white, high performance boat within 75 feet of shore! (Visibility problem over an excessively-long deck, I'm hearing). Quote:
Is that enough safety—where there's absolutely no chance of drowning?? At speeds that vary between 50 and 130-MPH, I can afford only a glance at the temperature gauge once a lap: If experience tells us to avoid distractions at high speed, how does a "driver", speeding across Winnipesaukee's shoals and 253 island-strewn waters at 150-feet per second or faster, manage high speed distractions with this panoply of instruments ...plus GPS???
__________________
Is it "Common Sense" isn't. Last edited by ApS; 04-11-2008 at 04:46 PM. Reason: add one more panel, poor GPS placement |
|||
04-11-2008, 05:42 PM | #234 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Effingham
Posts: 408
Thanks: 37
Thanked 19 Times in 15 Posts
|
Acres per Second wrote:
At speeds that vary between 50 and 130-MPH, I can afford only a glance at the temperature gauge once a lap: If experience tells us to avoid distractions at high speed, how does a "driver", speeding across Winnipesaukee's shoals and 253 island-strewn waters at 150-feet per second or faster, manage high speed distractions with this panoply of instruments ...plus GPS??? I have a few problems with this one. First, if you were traveling across Winnie at 120 in a floatplane you had better have been airborne as liftoff is somewhere between 35 and 65. Second, I raced SCCA a long time ago at speeds in excess of what you mention. If I could look only at the temp gauge once per lap we would have never won a race. You must develop a scan of the instruments, whether in an aircraft, a race car or a boat, performance or otherwise. When you have enough experience you just know when something looks wrong (a needle in the wrong position) without really seeing it. If you can't, you should be doing something else. |
04-11-2008, 06:30 PM | #235 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
APS,
If you can't look at instruments at speeds between 50 and 130 MPH, then how do people fly jet planes? Last I heard they fly around 600 MPH, sometimes right over the lake. Seriously, if the traffic on the lake is dense enough so don't have time to look at your instruments or to navigate, then you should slow down, you are being reckless. If you are crossing shoals or dodging islands so fast that you can't read your instruments or navigate, you should slow down, you're being reckless. If you operate your boat recklessly you should be fined or jailed. Not one speed limit opponent will recommend operating recklessly. Not one speed limit opponent will suggest that speeds over 45 MPH are appropriate at all times and all places. This is pretty simple stuff you think that you would have got it by now. |
04-14-2008, 06:43 AM | #236 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Quote:
I will say it again...there is no data that proves that speed is an issue on Lake Winni. |
|
04-14-2008, 08:35 AM | #237 | |||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 2,160
Thanked 765 Times in 548 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
All boats are stuck in one dimension and, among Winnipesaukee's cowboys, small boats are the most-stuck. Quote:
Most of us use lights like this one: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"Law or no law, you cannot stop the speeding and noise any more than you can on route 93. I will continue to boat as I always have. And, from what I have been told, even if I get issued a ticket, which is VERY unlikely, it can be fought and won." Quote:
"...As the owner of a boat that will do well over 90 mph,this proposed law will do nothing to change the way I boat one bit..." Quote:
Watch for me—especially if I'm capsized. |
|||||||||
04-14-2008, 10:04 AM | #238 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 146
Thanks: 46
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
|
Quote:
Sorry - did you just compare a float plane and a boat in the same sentence when discussing speed limits ON the water!? If that is the path you're going to take... You mention you teach high-speed car control in automobiles, most recently at 130mph. Impressive, but I have traveled over land at 640mph. - yes really! Ohhhh, wait - I was in a commercial airliner... but it's the same thing, right!? Sorry - your stance is really starting to take on water here - pun intended. As much as I envy your dad for piloting the boat that he did - back in the day (loved those boats) - and being an accomplished pilot, I'm not asking about your Dad here, I'm talking about you. I don't mix alcohol and boating either - water on the water, beer on the pier - a rule (and saying) instituted by the publisher of Poker Runs Magazine, Bill Taylor. All those "distractions" you mention on the dash of a performance boat are very easily managed, if you have the experience and know-how. There are only a few that you need to be concerned about in the short-term, oil & water - temp and pressure, as you know are the "life blood" of ANY internal combustion 4-stroke motor. Aside of that, all the rest are fuel level, speed, tach, boost, volts, etc... As far as the kayak incident being caused by "an excessively long deck" on the accused offending vessel - pure speculation! Once a performance boat is on plane, the deck is flat and you can see the horizon just fine above it, and what is in the water in front of you as well. Now, take a 35' or 40' cruiser plowing along at 15 knots - there is a visibility problem due to deck position! Notice the attached picture - that was taken at 110mph (see the GPS in the middle of the pic.?), look at the deck position - you can't even see it, visibility just fine! Oh, and that boat is 32' long - a real 32', not including any platforms etc... And we were running in the Delta, where there were no other boats to worry about and it is perfectly legal to do so. And yes, throttles are in the back position as it is operated with foot throttles, and full drive and tab trim controls on the wheel so you can keep both hands on it. And we are wearing suspender style life vests - USCG approved BTW... |
|
04-14-2008, 02:23 PM | #239 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Hearing Monday April 21
From an email...
The Senate Transportation commitee has set the public hearing date. It will be Monday, April 21st 9-12am. This is the last public hearing before the NH Senate votes on HB847. |
04-14-2008, 03:02 PM | #240 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
|
04-14-2008, 09:46 PM | #241 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
|
I found these two articles, one from the Associated Press the other from the Boston Globe, interesting and very telling for the future funding of the New Hamsphire Marine Patrol.
First the AP article from March 28: Boatbuilding hits the rocks Then this article today from the Globe Boat owners struggling to jump ship (It appears you may have to register for free in order to view the articles) There are other articles that talk about stock prices for boat manufacturers taking hits, and West Marine Q4 profits way off as well but these two articles are representative, and funny neither one mentions a speed limit as the cause or even a factor! So, how do these stories impact the Marine Patrol? As has been mentioned a number of times on this forum, the Marine Patrol gets its funding from NH boat registrations. That is why they have been doing direct mailings recently to boat owners asking you to register directly through the Marine Parol. That way they don't have to share the revenue with the towns. If the economic factors that are effecting the boatbuilder and Massachusetts boaters looking to get out are also being felt in New Hampshire, the Marine Patrol budget will suffer. So now we're looking at the possibility of a new law that will require new enforcement efforts from an agency that is facing funding cuts. Since New Hampshire Governor John Lynch has told his agency heads that because of an expected $50,000,000 budget shortfall to be prepared for cuts. Even in the unlikely event that the state does step in and level fund the Marine Patrol the need for a new series of radar patrols is still a cutback since those patrols require radar certified Marine Patrol officers (training costs) to run radar duty instead of conducting safety patrols (patrol cutbacks). Accomplishing that, to cover a lake that is 72 square miles, is going to take more than one radar boat! Such a move would be a reduction in safety to all boaters that I strongly oppose and actually will make the lake a LESS SAFE PLACE TO BE! Ironic, a law requiring a speed limit could actually make the lake less safe! In another thread someone asked how opponents to the speed limit would react if there are 22 speed related deaths this summer? I will pose the same question to you. How are you going to sleep at night if, because of the required radar patrols to enforce your speed limit, a boat is involved in an accident in an area where a Marine Patrol boat would normally be but can't be because it's doing a speed trap patrol and the victim of the accident dies? Speed is not a problem on Lake Winnipesaukee but there are problems and taking the only law enforcement on the lake and cutting their patrol time to enforce an unnecessary law is just plain stupid! |
04-15-2008, 05:48 AM | #242 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 2,160
Thanked 765 Times in 548 Posts
|
Decks, Distractions and Distorted Windshields...
Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps he was distracted by something (cellphone?), but my "math" tells me that he simply couldn't see the lesser boat because of excessive deck on his boat. Quote:
On Lake Winnipeaukee, you'd be traveling at 161.334 feet per second on protected inland waters with an "Unsafe Passage" law. Your "driver" would have less than one heartbeat to dodge a turtle, a surfacing loon, capsized sailboarder or a swimmer. (And certainly couldn't come to a halt in time). At those speeds (and greater) the GPS should be of a "heads-up" display, not low on the panel; that is, if the windshield were suitably undistorted. Say, is that a boat "not to be worried about" in the windshield distortion? Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
04-15-2008, 10:50 AM | #243 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Quote:
Where were those pics taken? Were they on Lake Winni? Was the driver experienced? Was the driver in either instance perhaps impaired? Maybe next you should post some pics of sailboat accidents that occurred somewhere around the globe. |
|
04-15-2008, 12:06 PM | #244 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
The horror!
These guys must have been going more than 45!
|
04-15-2008, 05:37 PM | #245 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 146
Thanks: 46
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
|
Quote:
So, you never addressed YOUR experience with performance boats!? Your "racer" that you built at Brewster... was it really a 1/12 scale!? Or was it the little 10' footer I mentioned with the 15hp outboard on it!? Come on, you can tell us Establish some credibility with me (and the board) here before you continue, that way we know if you know what you are talking about with regard to performance boats - and didn't just read it in a magazine. As for the boat I was in, Cali. Delta - and the canopies only look distorted from that angle (the back seat) - they are F16 canopies that are optically correct and provide a PERFECTLY CLEAR view when sitting in either of the two front seats. (I know, I was sitting in both of them - at different times - at some point in time that day). That is a boat that you see through the canopy - it was over 1 mile down, we slowed down long before getting to it. And the GPS - who cares where that is located, it offers NO information pertaining to safe operation, it just tells you how fast you're going. Again, if you had any real experience with performance boats, you'd know that. As for the $1mil. dollar boat that you posted a picture of above, do you know the owner and / or story behind that picture!?!? I do! What was your point in posting that...!? It happened 2,000 miles from the lake. In fact - your point in posting any of those pics!? I can start to post pics of car accidents, plane crashes, jet skis that are smashed up - even bowriders that are wrecked... again, what's the point!? Tell you what - again, establish some credibility for yourself in the high performance boating world, and we can have an adult conversation - now that you "are all grown up". Until then, stop posting your propaganda - 'cuz all you're doing is clouding the facts... As far as the incident as "told to you" on the long foredeck issue, that is - at best - second-hand information, again - pure speculation, and since you were not actually there, dismissed! |
|
04-16-2008, 10:29 AM | #246 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: north eastern ma
Posts: 27
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
always a danger
yes there is always a danger, mabey the kayak should stay out of open areas where speeding boats will be . (common sense yes)you run the risk of getting killed crossing the street , as crazy drivers are on the road and the water , you have to value and watch out for your own life dont expect other people to,SO yes I say of course the kayak is in danger of getting whacked but you know if you dont want to be in that position then dont put yourself in that position , lets go guys LIVE FREE OR DIE, COMMON SENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
04-17-2008, 08:13 AM | #247 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
That's not what Live Free or Die means! Common sense is not traveling at high speeds on a lake that is populated by small, slow moving boats. It is not - this "get out of my way" additude. You're comparing kayaks on the lake to people crosing a street - well, guess what? Streets have speed limits!
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
|
|
04-18-2008, 11:51 AM | #248 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,325
Thanks: 5
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
__________________
[Assume funny, clever sig is here. Laugh and reflect... ] |
|
04-22-2008, 10:27 AM | #249 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
|
|
04-24-2008, 06:54 PM | #250 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: north eastern ma
Posts: 27
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
04-25-2008, 06:35 AM | #251 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,663
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 349
Thanked 630 Times in 282 Posts
|
You have the freedom
Quote:
You have the right to enter the scene along with everyone else. Your choice of which freedoms to exercise will be moderated by your personal level and tolerance of fear. Suck it up. Chances are very good that you won't be hit.
__________________
-lg |
|
04-25-2008, 09:06 AM | #252 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
|
04-25-2008, 09:10 AM | #253 |
Senior Member
|
The kayak was empty when struck if you remember right. Because the Nude Kayaker had bailed out so he wouldn't be seen. May it please the court, I would remind everyone this happened AT NIGHT WITH NO LIGHTS!!!!
So please don't go there! |
04-25-2008, 09:27 AM | #254 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
And I am sure the kayakers were not drinking.
|
04-25-2008, 10:03 AM | #255 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Sorry, I couldn't let that one get by.
Give all the explanations you want. Lakegeezer's post was incorrect.
Jumping out of the Kayak just before it gets cut in half comes under any reasonable definition of "run over". Let me ask. As to drinking... Is it OK to say that a given accident never happened, as long as drinking was involved? If that is true there are quite a few accidents on our highways that never happened. |
04-25-2008, 10:21 AM | #256 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central CT
Posts: 90
Thanks: 19
Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
|
It is of course not appropriate to pretend it never happened. If anything, attention should be brought to any safety issues related to alcohol. No other factors can really be attributed to an accident once you determine that alcohol was a factor however. If somebody is boating under the influence, its fairly safe to assume that they are ignoring any and all appropriate laws.
Also, regarding the kayak accident, I do believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that the kayakers abandoned ship well before they were hit, at a distance such that if they had not jumped out they could have just paddled out of the way. Perhaps if they were not drunk, naked, and without a light, it wouldn't have happened? |
04-25-2008, 10:24 AM | #257 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
04-25-2008, 10:38 AM | #258 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Quote:
BI... The accident did occur.... a powerboat struck an unlit, unmanned kayak! HOWEVER, it is not the fault of the powerboat operator. Under NH Law, USCG rules and COLREGS, the Kayak was a hazard to navigation simply by the virtue of not properly displaying a light. IF you want to go a step further, the paddler was intoxicated! I dont particulalry care that he was nude... although I do think it a bit odd and is probably related to his AIS (Alcohol Induced Stupidity)! Had the kayaker been sober, he probably would have been displaying the proper lighting, and the accident probably would not have happened, as the operator of the powerboat was SOBER! Every accident scenario you post seems to have one common thread... Alcohol Intoxication!! I agree with Chmeee... anytime you have an accident and it is determined that alcohol is involved, all bets are off! Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. Last edited by Woodsy; 04-25-2008 at 10:51 AM. Reason: BI had a point... he didnt blame anyone! ;) |
|
04-25-2008, 10:43 AM | #259 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
I don't think Lakegeezer was lying, he probably forgot that last summers accident would apply to his statement. But don't accuse me of spin when I point out the error. If one of you had pointed out the error would that have been spin? Woodsy- When did I blame anyone for this accident. You are going overboard (pun intended). I posted one sentence to remind people that it did happen. After that I was responding to criticism. |
|
04-25-2008, 10:49 AM | #260 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,663
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 349
Thanked 630 Times in 282 Posts
|
There is more to this story than has been told
OK - maybe we can count this one as a kayak accident, but its hard to use it as a reason to impose speed limits, boat size or HP limits - as those issues don't seem to be a factor in this case. This falls into the category of freedom to take risks (boating while dark, no lights, drunk and nude). The kayakers got caught on this one. Have we seen the offical accident report? Perhaps the kayakers abandoned ship as to not get caught nude, and therefore it was not an accident involving people, but just a case of a boat hitting lake debris at night.
__________________
-lg |
04-25-2008, 10:49 AM | #261 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Quote:
Evenstar... You do lots of everyday activites "At Your Own Peril"! Driving a car, crossing a street, riding a bicycle are all everyday activities that put YOU at risk of serious injury or death! A far greater risk than you have paddling on Lake Winnipesaukee on the BUSIEST of summer days! In all of those activities above, a 2000lb+ vehicle is passing within 10' of you at speed. Everyday people get injured or killed in NH as a result of those everyday activities! No kayaker has ever been struck and seriously injured or killed on Lake Winnipesaukee... EVER! Kayaking by its very nature is a perilous sport... People drown all the time using kayaks. Statistically speaking, kayaks and canoes are the most dangerous of all watercraft. That is if you read the USCG Boat Safetey Reports! You need to come up with a better argument... Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
04-25-2008, 12:21 PM | #262 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,942
Thanks: 541
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
|
Quote:
A powerboat hit an empty, unlit kayak that was floating free in the water at night. The kayak was merely a piece of debris at that point, left as a hazard by an inconsiderate person. |
|
04-25-2008, 01:49 PM | #263 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
I posted my reminder to Lakegeezer because what he posted was incorrect, he has since agreed it was incorrect. However you guys have to make a mountain out of a mole hill and not let it go. There is an unfortunate tendency on this forum to discount accidents. They are excused away for a number of reason, mostly alcohol. ALL accidents need to be considered when it comes to safety. Certainly alcohol abuse and other idiotic behavior must be taken into consideration. But an accident is still an accident. I'm sorry if you don't like my "reminder". However in the future I will continue to post reminders whenever I think an accident is being overlooked, discounted or forgotten. I went back to the thread on the accident. SIKSUKR knows the people in the boat. At the time he posted... "The guy saw the boat coming,bailed and swam to the shore." That doesn't sound like the kayak was a floating piece of debris. Sounds more like a close call. The kayaker is a lucky idiot, we can all agree on that. |
|
04-25-2008, 02:15 PM | #264 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
The actual statictics
Quote:
Here's the truth: In Boating Statistics 2006, the USCG gives that there were 27 boating fatalities in the United States where the vessel was a kayak – out of 710 total boating fatalities – that’s only 3.8%. 49% of the boats involved in fatal accidents in 2006 were open motorboats and 10% were personal watercraft. The 2002 National Recreational Boating Survey Report (the latest year I can find) gives that 48.1% of boaters use open motorboats and 14.4% use kayaks. So the ratio of open motorboats percent involved in fatalities to the percent of boaters using this type of vessel is 1.02 to 1 (.49 /.481). For kayakers the ratio is 0.26 to 1 (.038 / .144.) So, according to actual statistics, open motorboats are 4 times more dangerous than kayaks. And 6 of those 27 kayak fatalities were not from drowning – and of those 21 who did drown, 5 were wearing PFD, which indicates that this was a result of more than just tipping over. The statistics do not give the type of water where the deaths occurred. White water kayaking results in a large percentage of all kayak fatalities. From the American Canoe Association – Canoe and Kayak Fatality Report: “From calendar year 1996 through 2002, 574 fatalities associated with canoes and kayaks were reported to the U.S. Coast Guard. Among the 558 paddling fatalities for which type of vessel is known, 72% were associated with canoes . . . the remainder 28% was associated with kayaks. Sea kayaks represented a very small proportion of fatalities (1% overall and 5% among kayaks).”
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
|
|
04-25-2008, 02:21 PM | #265 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
|
I talked to one of the girls who was in the boat.They were traveling well under the proposed 25 mph night speed limit.There were 2 kayaks and a man and a woman operating them.They had no lighting and new the boat could not see them so they bailed out and swam to shore.The boat operaters spent some time trying to find the kayakers and finally found them on shore.They were actually hiding because of their embaressment.the boat finally took them on board and brought them to the camp they were renting.The camp owner had the nerve to try and recoup the damages from the boat operaters.This makes about as much sense as someone using this accident as an example for kayaker's fear for their safety.Pleeease.
__________________
SIKSUKR |
04-25-2008, 02:29 PM | #266 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,412
Thanks: 216
Thanked 782 Times in 464 Posts
|
Quote:
They were not in an area where the boat was traveling at excessive speeds by any means and there has been no report to indicate otherwise. I do believe that the boater was not at fault, they hit a unmanned, unlit kayak that sits low in the water in the dark. Had the person been in kayak I still think that a court would have a tough time finding the boater negligent. |
|
04-25-2008, 03:59 PM | #267 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
|
Quote:
I will agree this was an accident. The cause of which was the 2 kayakers KUI. |
|
04-26-2008, 05:06 AM | #268 | ||||||||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,893
Thanks: 2,160
Thanked 765 Times in 548 Posts
|
Mythbusters For The Defense...
Because of the $2000 threshold for a NHMP report—and no injury—why would this require a report to the NHMP? Failing that—and that the CG has no jurisdiction on Winnipesaukee—will it even appear in Coast Guard statistics?
Quote:
How are the salmon fishermen, fishermen at anchor, kayaks, tubers, floating debris, anchored swimmers, anchored picnickers, and the occasional errant swim float to be accounted for in any Interstate example? Quote:
Not exactly a jaywalker strolling out between parked SUVs, was she? It's not right to "project" a view of a non-participant into this incident. We don't know that to be FACT. Quote:
...and... Quote:
...and... Quote:
The news article states, "...the kayak had no lights...". A kayak does not need "lights". A single 360° hand-held light is sufficient. Did the reporter expect to find the "missing lights" in an overturned and abandoned kayak with several feet of its bow missing? SIKSUKR's account (DUI, naked, no lights) was 3rd-hand; plus, we don't have any corroborating evidence from the press. The "NH Bass Foundation Nation" account (if there was one) could be parroting what appears anywhere on the Internet! Quote:
Quote:
If "kayaks can't be seen", I will agree with Mee&Mac and Evenstar that a strobe should be allowed for after-dark kayaking. (Even one that does not meet the on-ON criterion. And yes, we should protect the fool at our own "expense"). (Some PFDs have strobe lights.) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Clothes-optional visitors at night—bringing no violence nor killing anyone—can be freely attacked, criticized, denigrated, abused and besmirched for a not-infrequent proclivity on quiet waters. Yet the same "Live-Free-or-Die" crowd will illogically defend the alcohol-induced excess which results in hundreds of reported accidents on the water annually, while tacitly defending Lake Winnipesaukee speeds double or triple the proposed daylight speed limit.
__________________
Is it "Common Sense" isn't. Last edited by ApS; 04-28-2008 at 03:12 AM. Reason: Edited to add last comment |
||||||||||||||
05-02-2008, 10:11 AM | #269 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
|
Missing Kayaker
In the spirit of APS type posts,I offer this one from the WMUR website.
Searchers Look For Missing Kayaker POSTED: 7:56 am EDT May 2, 2008 UPDATED: 10:17 am EDT May 2, 2008 ORFORD, N.H. -- Authorities are searching for a Vermont man after his empty kayak was found floating in the Connecticut River in New Hampshire. New Hampshire Fish and Game Lt. Todd Bogardus said 58-year-old Robert Swantak of Bradford, Vt., went out for an afternoon of kayaking and fiddlehead fern picking Thursday. He started in the Waits River in Bradford, which joins the Connecticut River that separates Vermont and New Hampshire. Swantak's family called police when he failed to return home. His overturned kayak was found a few miles down river in Orford, N.H., but there was no sign of Swantak. Authorities from both states searched until after midnight and will begin searching again Friday morning. Bogardus said officials remain optimistic that Swantak made it to shore, but he notes that the river is at high flood level with very swift currents and cold water temperatures.
__________________
SIKSUKR |
05-02-2008, 10:27 AM | #270 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Quote:
Oh and regarding the alcohol-induced excess, there is already a BUI law. Enforce it. |
|
05-02-2008, 10:31 AM | #271 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,412
Thanks: 216
Thanked 782 Times in 464 Posts
|
Quote:
This "Live-Free-or-Die" crowd does not condone naked kayaking while drunk and stupid in the dark without any navigation lights, and we do not condone alcohol related stupidity behind the wheel of a boat. We push for better education, enforcement of current laws and promoting a safe lake. We do not promote a fear based campaign full of BS and empty of facts like our opposition. There is no rampant issue with boats traveling 3 times the proposed speed limit on Winnipesaukee, I am not sure what Winnipesaukee you live on. There is a handful at most that are capable of speeds over 100mph, nonetheless 135mph. |
|
05-02-2008, 01:17 PM | #272 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,149
Thanks: 205
Thanked 424 Times in 242 Posts
|
More statistics
Quote:
Evenstar, I agree with your analysis that kayaks are a relatively safe way to enjoy the water. Woody did say " kayaks and canoes". Since canoes have about 3 times as many accidents as kayaks lumping them together puts them at "about" the same fatality level as open motorboats. However, lumping them together may not be fair to your point. The relative safety of the type of watercraft seems a bit off the topic of the risk to others by boats exceeding 45 MPH. Specifically, your point has been the risk to kayakers by such high speed boats. In Boating Statistics 2006, on page 27, is a chart entitled TYPES OF ACCIDENTS BY TYPE OF VESSEL. There are 3 types of accident that seem pertinent to the discussion, Collisions with other vessels, Struck by boat, and Struck by motor. For 2006 only 2 kayaks and 2 canoes had been involved in collision accidents. This is out of a total of 6753 accidents reported in the U.S. We don't know anything further about the actual speed of the collisions that occurred. I can't argue against the physical reality that IF a large fast moving boat struck a kayak or canoe that the small craft would be in great danger and the operator at risk for severe injury or death. However, collisions are extremely rare, even when looking at the whole country. You are not guaranteed you will not be hit but the laws and statistics are strongly on your side. Worrying about any kind of significant collision is like being afraid of being struck by lightening. |
|
05-02-2008, 01:41 PM | #273 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Before every thunderstorm on the lake I watch boats go through the Bear Island NWZ at full speed. Why do they do that? How many people stay inside, end the golf game early, cancel little league etc. Did you ever hear that first boom followed in a heartbeat by a mother screaming "get out of the water"? |
|
05-02-2008, 02:12 PM | #274 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
If you're going to lump all paddle boats together, you also need to lump all power boats together. Then do the math, and you'll see that I'm still correct. Quote:
Boats on Winni that were traveling well in excess of 45 mph, have violate my 150 foot zone by a considate amount . . . in some cases, within 50 feet of me. And this has occurred more than once. If lightening was striking that close, I wouldn't just sit there, waiting for the next strike . . . regardless of the statistics! Note: I do know what 45mph looks like on the water. And I'm really good at extimating distance. If a boat is only 3 to 4 kayak lengths away from me, it is way closer than 150 feet.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
|
||
05-02-2008, 02:24 PM | #275 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Merrimack, NH
Posts: 132
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Come on now
APS Said "Clothes-optional visitors at night—bringing no violence nor killing anyone—can be freely attacked, criticized, denigrated, abused and besmirched for a not-infrequent proclivity on quiet waters.
Yet the same "Live-Free-or-Die" crowd will illogically defend the alcohol-induced excess which results in hundreds of reported accidents on the water annually, while tacitly defending Lake Winnipesaukee speeds double or triple the proposed daylight speed limit. " How frequently does this happen APS that there are paddlers out at night?? I am going to leave the clothing optional part out because that is just and amusing aside. Why is it ok for a small boat to be out at night without lights? Why are they not subject to same rules as the rest of us? Where in all of this discussion has anyone said outright that operating any motorized vehicle is ok while intoxicated. Apparently I am one of these Live-Free-or-Die" crowd and I don't believe that. I do think that as a responsible person if I decided to paddle at night I would make myself as conspicuous as possible. Reflective tape on my PFD, a 360 degree light, a flash light so if these other things didn't work I could flash it a passing boat. Maybe even an air horn to blast at the boat to let my presence known. I would not decide that it was ok to abandon my vessel and leave it adrift in the path of an oncoming vessel. Where are you coming from with this?
__________________
If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane |
05-02-2008, 03:11 PM | #276 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
Quote:
i'm not afraid of speeding boats because a) there aren't a lot of them and b) i've never had an issue with a speeding boat and i've got over 1,000 boating hours on this lake. If you have a fear of being hit by lightning or being run over by a speeding boat, stay inside when it rains and don't venture out on the lake when you see that boat going by your house at 130 mph (and please call me, i've yet to see that). i don't think many boaters are afraid of the lake. i wonder what a survery would produce if you asked the question to boaters on lake winnipesaukee: are you afraid of boating on the lake? i think you'd find an over-whelming majority say they feel safe on the lake (in my opinion).
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
|
05-02-2008, 04:16 PM | #277 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central CT
Posts: 90
Thanks: 19
Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
|
Quote:
First of all, most members of the population are quite frightened by lightning and the high speed that it moves at (up to 93,000 miles per second). It can be especially scary if the lightning strikes within 150 feet of a person. Second, it would reduce noise pollution. The thunder produced by lightning is mainly due to high speed of the electricity traveling through the air. Reduced to 45 miles per hour it would be a quiet buzzing sound. Third, it could benefit the loon population. They are quite sensitive to sound and motion, so they could get out of the area before being struck as the lightning approached at a reasonable and prudent speed. Fourth, children's camps could operate on the water with less fear. Think about it! |
|
05-02-2008, 04:47 PM | #278 |
Senior Member
|
Here's a question that is obvious to everyone:
rain, sunshine, lightning, 46mph motorboating, cloudy skies, windy Which item is exclusive of this group?
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
05-02-2008, 05:33 PM | #279 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
that's easy, sunshine; it the only thing that isn't "feared" on the lake (sarcasm font applied - i don't want people thinking i'm afraid of a 46 mph boat - geeesh).
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
05-03-2008, 07:01 AM | #280 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,942
Thanks: 541
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
|
|
05-03-2008, 07:48 AM | #281 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,980
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
I'm scared of sunlight. I wear sunblock. People who tan nicely make me look more pasty than I am. There obviously needs to be a law against tanning so that my feelings are not hurt.
|
05-03-2008, 07:53 AM | #282 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,980
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
Wouldn't it be every item you excluded? I'll take a stab or two though, King Tut? A baby's arm holding an apple? |
|
05-03-2008, 11:16 AM | #283 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
|
05-09-2008, 04:24 PM | #284 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 45
Thanks: 8
Thanked 41 Times in 10 Posts
|
For what it's worth
Now that I've digested the different views in HB 847, I thought I'd offer my opinion -- not that I think anyone will change their mind. I've been boating since I was a child. We've always had sailboats, canoes and powerboats on lakes, big and small. I've been boating here since we bought a home on the lake in 1991. I have to say that in all those years I have never had a close or frightening or even particularly annoying encounter with a so-called GFBL or "ocean racer" or anyone traveling 60, 70, 90 mph or more. I've seen them, I've even been in them on occasion, but I've never been in a position where I felt threatened by one.
Having said that, I don't have any visceral or passionate objection to speed limits, either. A speed limit will not directly affect my boating, for good or for bad. It is seldom enjoyable traveling more than 35-40 mph in my 23 footer and most of my boating is at even slower speeds. If I had to rank the factors that affect my enjoyment of the lake, I'm not certain that 60 mph boats, or whatever your definition of speeding is, even make the list. Let's face it, the most important factor affecting our ability to enjoy the lake is the weather, at least in some years. If I thought that the NH Legislature could command ideal boating weather all season, I'd be in Concord lobbying right now, but I doubt even they think that they have that much power. And of course there would be multiple threads on this forum arguing about what "ideal weather" is -- warm, hot, windy, calm, etc. Other than the weather, the two most important factors, in my experience, are the volume of boats and rude, obnoxious, clueless boaters. The volume of boats is a difficult issue for me to address. After all, there were fewer boats on the lake before I arrived, and one more after I did. Who am I to deny someone else the pleasure I have enjoyed just because I got here first? But we can do something about the rude, obnoxious and clueless boaters. The most frightening experience I have ever had while boating occurred on this lake two years ago. My kids were tubing in the area among Long Island, Little Bear and Dow. Another family in a boat much like mine was towing a child on a tube and there was more than enough room for us to stay out of each other's way, which we did for 30 minutes or so. Then my son fell off of the tube and as I circled around to go back for him I suddenly saw the other boat headed directly for him, on a course approximately 90 degrees from mine. More frightening was the fact that it was obvious that the "driver" (he was hardly a captain at that point) had one hand on the wheel but was facing the stern watching his tuber. Of course that's what spotters are for. Fortunately he was still several hundred feet away and I accelerated and sounded my horn while slightly changing my course to put my boat between him and my son (some might argue with my response, but in the split second I had to decide it's what I came up with). He came within 50 feet before seeing us, veered away and gave me the one-finger salute. He was not traveling more than 15 or 20 mph. I try to be tolerant, but that's the guy I want off of the lake! Well, okay, we can try to educate him first (with a 2x4?), but people like him are far more frightening to me, and far more numerous in my experience, than the boaters who will leave because of a 45 mph speed limit. I'm not going to pick up my toys and go home if the speed limit bill passes. I won't even yell loudly or race through the Bear Island NWZ in protest. But I don't expect to feel any safer, either – I don’t feel unsafe now. In my opinion, any serious and sincere effort to improve safety on the lake begins with education and enforcement. The thing I fear more than any speeding boater is that the outcome of this campaign will be followed by…. nothing… while the "winners" rest on their laurels and the "losers" sulk. |
05-10-2008, 12:15 AM | #285 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
|
Quote:
In 2006, the last year that NH Marine Patrol statistics are available to my knowledge; 33% of the BOATING FATALTIES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE INVOVLED KAYAKS! The other fatalties were drownings, not boating accidents. Of the 84 boating accidents in the entire state, .04% involved boats going more than 45mph, and of those THREE only ONE was on Winnipesuakee! Don't you hate numbers? |
|
05-10-2008, 09:51 PM | #286 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Airwaves, when quoting statistics, you really should provide a link. How do I know that you are not just making up these numbers, or that you interpreting the data correctly? I won't discuss something that I can't view for myself.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
|
05-11-2008, 05:29 AM | #287 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 73
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
What if we adopted Evenstar policy?
Expanding your policy not to discuss something you can't or haven't viewed for yourself (not just data but claimed boat violators too) would eliminate most of the current debate. How many of those opposed to adding more speed laws have seen boats going so fast that they can not see you until panic time? There is no study or report to show any lapse of proper lookout or safe boating and attribute it to speed over 45 mph?
|
05-11-2008, 06:42 AM | #288 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Windham and Meredith
Posts: 225
Blog Entries: 5
Thanks: 33
Thanked 89 Times in 42 Posts
|
well said Alsadad
Alsadad,
I couldn't agree more. A speed limit has no affect on me at all. My boat will barely go that fast and I rarely do. I also have not been affected by those fast scary boats. I do worry that our understaffed, underfunded, underequipped Marine Patrol will be burdened with yet another job that will make them less responsive in emergency situations. All of their boats are not fully equipped with GPS and other equipment now and forcing them to have RADAR on board will make it even harder for them to afford the other essentials. |
05-11-2008, 08:05 AM | #289 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Pretty much my experience as well. We were tubing over here last summer, parallel with the shoreline. The very same type of moron did much the same thing, forgetting what he was doing, where his course was, where we were. Same one finger salute. Most of the real idiots on the lake here are going slower, usually with tubers. There are the real idiots that take their poor car driving experience out on the lake. They never learn what's the proper way to boat, no common sense or courtesy involved whatsoever. The laws all apply to these infractions Now. But alas, they are rarely enforced due to lots of reasons. Those seeking more rules and regulations rarely mention enforcement. The speed limit crowd doesn't ant to discuss anything not favorable for their agenda, nor do they want to discuss the actual problems on the lakes. You'll still have 150' violations, idiots in rentals, obnoxious drunks, and naked kayakers with no lights |
|
05-11-2008, 11:37 AM | #290 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
|
Quote:
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=4283 The information was posted by Woodsy in February 2007 and as a matter of fact you were the third person to write a response. Funny you don't remember the things that don't back your claims that every time you're on Winnipesaukee you experience a close call with speeding boats! |
|
05-11-2008, 12:01 PM | #291 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Plus they have at least two hand held units that were used for a recent survey. I don't believe enforcement will be much of a problem. The speed limit is mostly self enforcing. If a problem develops they can send out an officer with a hand held to set up a speed trap during a few peek hours. A speed limit sets a standard of behavior for the community. Most people are law abiding. And according the the opponents, almost nobody goes over 45 anyway. So how can enforcement be such a problem? |
|
05-11-2008, 01:36 PM | #292 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
Quote:
Why not stop trying to make your arguements sound logical, it's waste of time. Just keep saying what you really mean and occasionally admit: You don't want fast boats on your lake and this law will send a message to them and drive them off. You don't want large boats on your lake and this law will provide a stepping stone to that end. Why pretend? |
|
05-11-2008, 01:58 PM | #293 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Who is pretending? I have never "admitted" I want high horsepower boats off the lake. I state it openly and often. Do I have to say it in every post? |
|
05-11-2008, 02:09 PM | #294 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
05-11-2008, 02:58 PM | #295 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,149
Thanks: 205
Thanked 424 Times in 242 Posts
|
Self enforcing speed limits?
|
05-11-2008, 03:41 PM | #296 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
I can't agree with that. I predict Bear Island will see a significant increase in boat traffic.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
05-11-2008, 04:35 PM | #297 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
Just say that you want the high horsepower boats off the lake, because that's what you want. And the speed limit law is just a handy tool. |
||
05-11-2008, 05:22 PM | #298 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
Cars go a little over the limit, boats will go a little over the limit. So What? Who cares? How often do cars go 70 mph on Pleasant St. or 140 mph on route 93?
Suppose a GFBL makes it a habit of going 90 mph around the lake. How many times per day will this be reported to the Marine Patrol? How long will it be before the Marine Patrol start looking for this boat? |
05-11-2008, 06:10 PM | #299 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
|
Quote:
Last edited by EricP; 05-11-2008 at 06:13 PM. Reason: Spelling |
|
05-11-2008, 07:33 PM | #300 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 664
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
I think you are right. I know that Bear Island is the shortest distance between any two points on Winni. Keep it slow and watch out for kayakers. If I owned Y Landing, I know I'd be offering the cheapest gas on the lake this summer. There is a captive audience just looking for a reason to say hello to everyone on Bear Island this summer.
|
Bookmarks |
|
|