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

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-12-2008, 09:09 PM   #1
Rattlesnake Guy
Senior Member
 
Rattlesnake Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,254
Thanks: 423
Thanked 366 Times in 175 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrc View Post
You do realize that airborne speed measurement rely on lines painted in the breakdown lane and stopwatches? not really high tech.
Saw them painting lines every 1/4 mile the other day. Special paint from 3M sticks to the water.....
Rattlesnake Guy is offline  
Old 06-12-2008, 09:39 PM   #2
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,615
Thanks: 256
Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts
Thumbs up Does latex paint stick to water?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Guy View Post
Saw them painting lines every 1/4 mile the other day. Special paint from 3M sticks to the water.....
Only you!

That was the best laugh I've had all day....thanks!
Skip is offline  
Old 06-12-2008, 09:53 PM   #3
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default I like it, the Marine Patrol Air Force! The NH Air Marines!

Quote:
Originally posted by Aquadeziac
Who says you have to look on the water for speed traps? There were two instances in the recent past where cars were clocked speeding.....one at 135 MPH,,,FROM THE AIR!! If that Cessenna can track the speed of a car at 10,000 ft up and it stands up in court, do you really think it won't work on the water?
I actually did consider using aircraft as an example of what might stand up in court in my original example, except to my knowledge the NH Marine Patrol does not own either a rotary or fixed wing aircraft and the expense makes it prohibitive so it's not a realistic scenario IMHO.
Quote:
Originally posted by This'nThat
Hmmmm. A boat measured at 100mph but yet not going in a straight line? Let's do an example. Suppose the boat was at a 30-degree angle off the "straight line"? Then the actual speed of the boat would be 115mph [100/Cosine(30)], meaning that the measurement would actually be an understatement -- much to your advantage if the MP doesn't compensate for the angle.
Much more complex example than I was thinking of, I was just thinking he made a couple of turns, maybe to avoid waves, debris or a marker but the result is the same however we still have the problem about the determination of when the suspect boat enters the start and exits the stop of the measured mile.

So, we have Radar, GPS and Aircraft. All of which will require crews and funding, what else could withstand the burden of proof?

Quote:
Originally posted by Rattlesnake Guy
Saw them painting lines every 1/4 mile the other day. Special paint from 3M sticks to the water.....
So THAT's what all that yellow is in the water!!!!

Last edited by Airwaves; 06-12-2008 at 10:02 PM. Reason: to make funny :)
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-13-2008, 06:38 AM   #4
jrc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
Default

You guys are crazy, they will paint the lines on the bottom of the lake. They're just waiting for DES permits.
jrc is offline  
Old 06-13-2008, 10:10 AM   #5
Island Lover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airwaves View Post
So, we have Radar, GPS and Aircraft. All of which will require crews and funding, what else could withstand the burden of proof?
You keep forgetting that speed limits are enforced on other lakes in NH. This isn't going to be a problem. Boats will go 5, 10 even 15 over the limit and get away with it. Just like on our highways, and who cares!

If some boat goes around the lake at 75 mph the MP will stop them (with or without Radar) and have a conversation with them. After that conversation the boat will either slow down to a more reasonable speed, or continue to scoff the law. If they continue the second boat stop will be a lot less pleasant. Do you think the MP are going to let someone continue to break the law in an open and in your face manner? Hey, these are cops, you are not going to beat them at their own game! You can piss them off, but in the end, they will win! Plus its not like the highways, you can't disappear or hide, they will find you sooner or later, probably sooner.

And no funding is required. Funding requires an appropriation by the state. The MP budget is not going to be increased because of HB847. An officer taking along a Radar unit while on Patrol and checking a few boat speed is not going to require a major MP shakeup. This just isn't that big a deal.
Island Lover is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 06-13-2008, 02:27 PM   #6
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Island Lover
And no funding is required. Funding requires an appropriation by the state. The MP budget is not going to be increased because of HB847. An officer taking along a Radar unit while on Patrol and checking a few boat speed is not going to require a major MP shakeup. This just isn't that big a deal.
You're right that HB847 does NOT increase funding for the Marine Patrol, but pretty much wrong about everything else.

AN officer isn't just going to throw a radar unit in the boat and check a few boats now and again.

The use of radar requires the operator of the radar unit be certified and the unit calibrated. It also requires a crew of two officers in the boat. Certification costs money, the second officer in the boat costs money, replacing that second officer on another boat costs money, court time costs money. This would be true for every radar post stationed on the lake, one isn't going to do it.

So the first MP boat stops your boat he thinks is going too fast and has a conversation, you continue on your way and run into the second MP boat that was alerted by the first and you're stopped again. Then what? If there was no use of radar, GPS and you were not tracked by aircraft then nothing, that's what. The MP might conduct a safety check looking for violations but as far as a citation for speeding? Not going to happen.

An officer's estimated speed based on what he/she visually observed is not enough for a conviction in a court of law under HB847.

So short of Radar, GPS and Aircraft (all of which will cost additional money) how will the Marine Patrol be able to enforce this law on a 72 square mile lake?

Where speed limits are in force on small lakes it involves prohibiting different types of watercraft and/or limiting horsepower. Not Marine Patrol enforcement.
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 07:47 AM   #7
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 Airwaves View Post
Where speed limits are in force on small lakes it involves prohibiting different types of watercraft and/or limiting horsepower. Not Marine Patrol enforcement.
Many years ago I was involved with placing a speed limit on a small New Hampshire lake. There were a few violations the first year it was in effect and I called the Marine Patrol. An officer arrived in a car and waited for the boat to return to shore. They didn't speed again.

There is no prohibiting of boat types on smaller lakes. Just speed limits that work.

If someone thinks they are going to operate their boat at 75 mph on Winni and the Marine Patrol will be helpless, then they don't know much about cops.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 10:59 AM   #8
KonaChick
Senior Member
 
KonaChick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 518
Thanks: 19
Thanked 62 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Many years ago I was involved with placing a speed limit on a small New Hampshire lake. There were a few violations the first year it was in effect and I called the Marine Patrol. An officer arrived in a car and waited for the boat to return to shore. They didn't speed again.

There is no prohibiting of boat types on smaller lakes. Just speed limits that work.

If someone thinks they are going to operate their boat at 75 mph on Winni and the Marine Patrol will be helpless, then they don't know much about cops.
BI did you have a place on that lake? You seem to be the superman of speed limits on lakes around the globe!!!
KonaChick is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 12:46 PM   #9
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Bear Islander
There is no prohibiting of boat types on smaller lakes. Just speed limits that work.
As shocking as this may sound, I will have to disagree with you on that statement.
I direct your attention to the Marine Patrol link of Restricted Bodies of Water. You will note that it routinely prohibits types of vessels and types of propulsion.

Why your own Squam Lake that has been touted as a model for Winnipesaukee prohibits certain types of vessels!
The document is 20 pages long!
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 02:49 PM   #10
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 KonaChick View Post
BI did you have a place on that lake? You seem to be the superman of speed limits on lakes around the globe!!!
I was the director of a camp for underprivileged children on that lake.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 08:37 PM   #11
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default Commendable!

Bear Islander, I applaude you for your work as the director of a camp for underprivileged children!

Now, in the context of what we are discussing, what lake are you referencing when you write;
Quote:
..."Many years ago I was involved with placing a speed limit on a small New Hampshire lake. There were a few violations the first year it was in effect and I called the Marine Patrol. An officer arrived in a car and waited for the boat to return to shore. They didn't speed again.

There is no prohibiting of boat types on smaller lakes. Just speed limits that work."
I would like to see how you were able to eliminate excessive speed (sorry, that doesn't exist without speed limits, right?) without either Marine Patrol support or banning certain types of watercraft?

See my link above to the Marine Patrol Restricted Bodies of Water in NH!

KonaChick seems to know of what lake you speak, so why not share it?
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 09:33 PM   #12
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 Airwaves View Post
Bear Islander, I applaude you for your work as the director of a camp for underprivileged children!

Now, in the context of what we are discussing, what lake are you referencing when you write;


I would like to see how you were able to eliminate excessive speed (sorry, that doesn't exist without speed limits, right?) without either Marine Patrol support or banning certain types of watercraft?

See my link above to the Marine Patrol Restricted Bodies of Water in NH!

KonaChick seems to know of what lake you speak, so why not share it?
In my political activist youth, Judd Gregg and I petitioned the Department of safety for restrictions on Sunset Lake in Greenfield. There was a hearing, we presented our case, and won the day. I gave up politics but Judd went on the be a Congressman, Governor and Senator.

The speed limit worked. It still works today. The camp has closed, but the other lake residents want to keep the speed limit.

Sorry, but there is nothing about what happened on Sunset lake that argues against HB847, quite the contrary. I have seen boating speed limits work fist hand.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 06-14-2008, 11:25 PM   #13
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

So let me get this straight just so I understand it correctly.

You are comparing the success of "speed limits" and the lack of enforcement of those "speed limits" on a 30 acre pond, to that of Lake Winnipesaukee?

Just to make sure we're talking about the same examples:

Quote:
Sunset Lake (aka Gould Pond) - Greenfield
SAF-C 402.78 - (a) No person shall operate a motorboat on Sunset Lake in Greenfield at a speed exceeding 10 MPH. However, this restriction shall not apply between 4:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. or sunset, whichever occurs first, on Monday through Saturday, both inclusive, and further provided during the restricted hours, motorboats shall not be operated at a speed exceeding 30 MPH.
(b) All waterskiing on Sunset Lake shall be in a counter-clockwise direction during the unlimited hours.

http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Fish...greenfield.pdf
Sunset Lake, Greenfield. 33 acres, NO PUBLIC ACCESS, Residents only, canoe/cartop launch next to beach.
What happens on Sunday, no boats allowed at all or is that when the GFBL boats show up to ski counter clockwise and create a big flushing whirlpool sound?

Quote:
http://www.winnipesaukee.org/watershed-facts.htm
Lake Winnipesaukee, Surface Water
Lake Winnipesaukee
44,586 acres
So Sunset Lake (Gould Pond) is the benchmark for Lake Winnipesaukee that you keep talking about as a camp director?

No Public Access and still the waterfont owners had to be forced by you (and Judd Gregg) to slow down to something you thought was reasonable?

Is there even that much surface water (33 acres) in the no wake zone near your camp on Bear Island?
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:51 AM   #14
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 Airwaves View Post
So let me get this straight just so I understand it correctly.

You are comparing the success of "speed limits" and the lack of enforcement of those "speed limits" on a 30 acre pond, to that of Lake Winnipesaukee?

Just to make sure we're talking about the same examples:


What happens on Sunday, no boats allowed at all or is that when the GFBL boats show up to ski counter clockwise and create a big flushing whirlpool sound?



So Sunset Lake (Gould Pond) is the benchmark for Lake Winnipesaukee that you keep talking about as a camp director?

No Public Access and still the waterfont owners had to be forced by you (and Judd Gregg) to slow down to something you thought was reasonable?

Is there even that much surface water (33 acres) in the no wake zone near your camp on Bear Island?

First. its a lake not a pond, the name it had in antiquity was erroneous. Second. it has public access with two beaches and a launch ramp.

The size of the lake is very small, not a good match for comparison to Winnipesaukee. What can be taken from it is that speed limits can and do work. And that people are, for the most part, law abiding.

The reason I bought it up was to illustrate that even a scofflaw that ignores the limit will change his ways after a law enforcement officer explains the situation to them.

You seem to think the MP will watch impotently while a boat cruises around the lake at 75 mph. That just is not going to happen.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 06-15-2008, 11:12 AM   #15
Hottrucks
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Lakes region NH
Posts: 48
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

not to be a wise guy or anything but how does a boat that goes 50 mph catch a boat going 75 mph and if they do all I want to know is who is going to get the ticket???? you who may have been ridding in the boat me who may have been driving it or gramma who is on the pourch cooking hot dogs??who may have been out there herself???
Hottrucks is offline  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:55 PM   #16
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Bear Islander
First. its a lake not a pond, the name it had in antiquity was erroneous. Second. it has public access with two beaches and a launch ramp.
You may classify it as a lake, but to me it's a large swimming hole! You could put 23 of similar size "lakes" onto Bear Island itself!

If there is public access it is apparently news to the New Hampshire Fish and Wildlife folks who make available this map to visitors who want to fish. Note that it clearly says NO PUBLIC ACCESS, RESIDENTS ONLY!

Quote:
Originally posted by Bear Islander
The size of the lake is very small, not a good match for comparison to Winnipesaukee. What can be taken from it is that speed limits can and do work. And that people are, for the most part, law abiding.
It still leaves a big big question, in a lake that massive...I mean pond that small how is it that you found the NEED to deal with lawmaking rather than just meet with your neighbors and talk it out?

Quote:
Originally posted by Bear Islander
The reason I bought it up was to illustrate that even a scofflaw that ignores the limit will change his ways after a law enforcement officer explains the situation to them.
Actually you have been very clear that the speed limit bill won't cost money and now we know how you have come to that very erronious conclusion. Didn't cost any money on Gould Pond, right?

Quote:
Originally posted by Bear Islander
You seem to think the MP will watch impotently while a boat cruises around the lake at 75 mph. That just is not going to happen.
Now to take a quote from any one of a number of posts by Bear Islander. I never said that! What I have said is that the LEGAL BURDEN OF PROOF is on the Marine Patrol, and without the expense of radar, GPS or aircraft tracking the Marine Patrol can NOT MEET THEIR BURDEN OF PROOF and if they can I'd like to know how!

Last edited by Airwaves; 06-15-2008 at 09:58 PM. Reason: Hit submit key before I was completely finished, now I'm done :)
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-15-2008, 11:02 PM   #17
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 Airwaves View Post
You may classify it as a lake, but to me it's a large swimming hole! You could put 23 of similar size "lakes" onto Bear Island itself!

If there is public access it is apparently news to the New Hampshire Fish and Wildlife folks who make available this map to visitors who want to fish. Note that it clearly says NO PUBLIC ACCESS, RESIDENTS ONLY!


It still leaves a big big question, in a lake that massive...I mean pond that small how is it that you found the NEED to deal with lawmaking rather than just meet with your neighbors and talk it out?


Actually you have been very clear that the speed limit bill won't cost money and now we know how you have come to that very erronious conclusion. Didn't cost any money on Gould Pond, right?


Now to take a quote from any one of a number of posts by Bear Islander. I never said that! What I have said is that the LEGAL BURDEN OF PROOF is on the Marine Patrol, and without the expense of radar, GPS or aircraft tracking the Marine Patrol can NOT MEET THEIR BURDEN OF PROOF and if they can I'd like to know how!
You sure know how to take the long way around the barn to make a useless point!

First there is, and has been, a public ramp on Sunset Lake. It is however limited to Greenfield residents.

Second, we didn't have trouble with the lake residents, they were a great bunch of neighbors. It was people that trailered in that caused the problems. In particular the boat from Camp Winamac that trailered in every day and skied for hours. They didn't like to water ski on their own lake because it screwed up their small boating.

Thirdly, they will do it by matching speeds or some other method. Your "they can't stop me" bravado is laughable!
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 06-16-2008, 12:44 PM   #18
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Bear Islander
Thirdly, they will do it by matching speeds or some other method. Your "they can't stop me" bravado is laughable!
In case you missed it, the entire point of this thread is to accertain, without use of Radar, GPS or Aerial observation, HOW THE MARINE PATROL CAN MEET THE BURDEN OF PROOF of HB847 IN A COURT OF LAW!
Quote:
or some other method
What other method? You in particular and a number of speed limit advocates have been saying this bill comes at no cost. I want to see exactly how you think the Marine Patrol will enforce this bill so that it meets the legal burden of proof. Explain what "Some other method" is exactly.

Quote:
a public ramp on Sunset Lake. It is however limited to Greenfield residents.
Then that would not make it a "public" ramp would it?

So you didn't like someone from "away" coming onto you pond to waterski? How horrible that must have been!

Kind of interesting how a camp director not necessarily a property owner, got this law passed imposing restrictions on property owners of the pond, then the camp director and the camp left the pond!

A 33 acre pond is Not Lake Winnipesaukee, enforcement needs and COSTS are something that should have been taken into account before this crusade was launched. If there aren't enough Marine Patrol crews to handle the 150 foot rule then cutting those numbers to set up radar posts is going to make things less enforceable all around.
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-16-2008, 01:39 PM   #19
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
That is how the law works. I had restrictions placed on them many years ago, and now I am having restrictions placed on you.
"I" am having restrictions placed on you.Pretty much sums up the arrogant demeanor behind the actions from some of these supporters.
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 06-17-2008, 10:00 AM   #20
Squam Friend
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

That single quote by "BearIslander" in siksukr's post above prompted me to join this forum, I was so appalled by the sheer audacity. "That is how the law works," as if whenever someone does something you don't like, you can get a law passed to stop them. Who do you think you are, BearIslander? I see that you must have edited the original post, but not before your true egotism and condescending attitude showed its face. You make it sound like you had a restraining order passed by claiming "I am having restrictions placed on you." I have to ask again, who do you think you are?

Having been a lifetime boater and resident on Squam Lake I would like to see a single piece of evidence that a speed limit "worked" to "solve a problem," and the same goes for the proposed limit on Winnipesaukee. The only actual non-anecdotal data I have seen does not support the need for a limit on speed. I sincerely hope Governor Lynch hears both sides of this issue and makes a reasonable decision, based on facts, on whether to sign this bill into law. That being said, I am not categorically against speed limits on lakes, but I am against legislation that is based on anecdotes, and not a real demonstrated need for a law to make a social change.
Squam Friend is offline  
Old 06-17-2008, 10:40 AM   #21
COWISLAND NH
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 35
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squam Friend View Post
That single quote by "BearIslander" in siksukr's post above prompted me to join this forum, I was so appalled by the sheer audacity. "That is how the law works," as if whenever someone does something you don't like, you can get a law passed to stop them. Who do you think you are, BearIslander? I see that you must have edited the original post, but not before your true egotism and condescending attitude showed its face. You make it sound like you had a restraining order passed by claiming "I am having restrictions placed on you." I have to ask again, who do you think you are?

Having been a lifetime boater and resident on Squam Lake I would like to see a single piece of evidence that a speed limit "worked" to "solve a problem," and the same goes for the proposed limit on Winnipesaukee. The only actual non-anecdotal data I have seen does not support the need for a limit on speed. I sincerely hope Governor Lynch hears both sides of this issue and makes a reasonable decision, based on facts, on whether to sign this bill into law. That being said, I am not categorically against speed limits on lakes, but I am against legislation that is based on anecdotes, and not a real demonstrated need for a law to make a social change.

THANK YOU -THANK YOU -THANK YOU!!!!! I personally don't like all the little blow boats zig zagin around across from our camp causing a traffic jam, but I wouldn't consider a ban on them bc of it.
By the way has any one seen the NH Marine patrol boating accident reports for 2007????
COWISLAND NH is offline  
Old 06-17-2008, 10:44 AM   #22
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 Squam Friend View Post
That single quote by "BearIslander" in siksukr's post above prompted me to join this forum, I was so appalled by the sheer audacity. "That is how the law works," as if whenever someone does something you don't like, you can get a law passed to stop them. Who do you think you are, BearIslander? I see that you must have edited the original post, but not before your true egotism and condescending attitude showed its face. You make it sound like you had a restraining order passed by claiming "I am having restrictions placed on you." I have to ask again, who do you think you are?

Having been a lifetime boater and resident on Squam Lake I would like to see a single piece of evidence that a speed limit "worked" to "solve a problem," and the same goes for the proposed limit on Winnipesaukee. The only actual non-anecdotal data I have seen does not support the need for a limit on speed. I sincerely hope Governor Lynch hears both sides of this issue and makes a reasonable decision, based on facts, on whether to sign this bill into law. That being said, I am not categorically against speed limits on lakes, but I am against legislation that is based on anecdotes, and not a real demonstrated need for a law to make a social change.
Well... I'm glad you joined the forum.

My post was a joke, and SIKSUKR only posted part of it. When I realized some people would not understand my particular brand of humor, I deleted the entire thing.

I did not write or sponsor HB847 and can take no credit for it. I have no authority to place restrictions on Airwaves or anyone else.

I'm sorry you got so worked up over the incomplete copy of a misunderstood joke. I will be more careful in the future. My apologies.

I can assure you that the speed limit on Sunset Lake was a god send that solved a very real problem. The underprivileged children from Nashua that attended the camp compliments of the United Fund were unable to go out in boats at all when there was water-skiing on our small lake. And that happened almost every afternoon and some mornings. The speed limit on that lake changed things dramatically and instantly.

That kind of success does not translate well to a large lake like Winnipesaukee. However the problems of the camps lakes are very real, and will be helped by HB847 in my opinion. The New Hampshire Camp Directors Association supports HB847.
Bear Islander 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 06:11 AM.


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

This page was generated in 0.40622 seconds