New Boaters Organization

[winnilaker]

Does Winnipesaukee and New Hampshire boaters need a non-profit organization that tries and protects the rights for all boaters? Promotes boating safety? Doesn't alienate boaters based on what they choose to use?

I guess this would be a tough one since people have different opinions, but there has to be a majority out there that share some common views. With new laws coming up and with ones that should be introduced, I would think the majority of those boaters need a medium to be well informed of all issues and a medium to express their issues.

[PROPELLER]

I know from reading Motorboating, the Boat US publication & other various sources that there are organizations around the country that have lobbies & stick up for boaters when issues arise. Boat US even has a voluntary contribution on their membership to help fund this kind of activity.

I think you raise a good point & if there was such an organization it may be very helpful on the many issues that affect boating on all NH bodies of water & Winni specifically.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Here in Florida we have two primary boater's advocate groups. "Standing Watch" and "Citizens for Florida's Waterways". If you like I could give you the email address and website that could provide you with a wealth of information. FO

[WeirsBeachBoater]

We need someone who can represent us, boaters who are being unfairly attacked and catergorized due to the type of boats we enjoy!

[frank m.]

Winnilaker,
You are in luck. Just such an organization has recently been formed. Please go to www.winnfabs.com to join and find out how you can help protect the rights of ALL boaters.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Wrong side of the coin!!!

[winnilaker]

I went to Winnfabs.com and only found information which appears to view folks with powerboats to be doing something bad. You can view my previous posts, I don't believe in Winnfabs.com views, since they don't represent the majority of boaters and all types of boaters.

I formed an organization 2 years http://www.nhrba.com
New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association. Its filed with the State of NH as a non-profit. I have legal representation, address and a real bank account. Anybody can take a look at it, I haven't updated it in a while, but I would like to get this thing off the ground with real directors and a board. Anybody interested in helping shape an organization that will treat all boaters with the same respect and is focused on promoting boating safety email me at info@nhrba.com

P.S. interesting point on winnfabs.com. I went to whois.net which tells me who registered the site (mr. W) his information and phone number where there on Monday, but by Tuesday they paid the extra $9 to have the information hidden as if they were hiding something. I did save the information but will refrain from disclosure since they obviously didn't want it promoted.

[03810]

FYI, the speed limit bill is currently being "retained in committee" which means the Resource Committee will study it over the summer.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

I formed an organization 2 years http://www.nhrba.com
New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association. Its filed with the State of NH as a non-profit. I have legal representation, address and a real bank account. Anybody can take a look at it

I checked you and your site out, also verified your "legit" claims through the Secretary of State's office. Congrats on being a properly filed above board entity, unlike (apparently) the super secret society at Winnfabs. Still not sure how I feel about the issue, and don't own a boat. But if I did, I would lean more towards an organization like yours that encompassed all boater concerns, vice the myopic view of the handful of naysayers representing the antis of the Winni!

Good luck, and a very nice site that you have there. I'll tell my boat owning kids about it and try to spread the word for you....

Bon Appetit and Salute!

[overlook]

Originally Posted by frank m.

Winnilaker,
You are in luck. Just such an organization has recently been formed. Please go to www.winnfabs.com to join and find out how you can help protect the rights of ALL boaters.

I have attempted to contact them, and had no reply. " The rights of all boaters" I don't think so.

[ITD]

In Massachusetts, its a pretty serious fine if you form a committee to affect a piece of legislation without registering it, especially if you accept contributions, is it the same in NH?

[Fat Jack]

I checked out this NHRBA site, but it appears to be another front for the cigarette boat only crowd. And all of the members list "Partying" as one of their primary interests. I get a quick sense where that is headed. Can't there be something that really represents the average guy who just wants to appreciate the lake? Seems like everyone has a narrow agenda these days. I'm starting to lean towards the feeling that 45MPH is not that bad. It's much faster than I'd ever want to go, and seems like a pretty fair compromise, all things considered. Seems like that's the direction we should all be headed if we are ever going to stop the bickering...looking for such a compromise. I had been feeling that the speed limit bill was just another attempt to take away our rights, until I started to think about how fast 45MPH really is on water. When we sit at our computers in the wintertime, it sounds restrictive. But when you are in a boat, you start to wonder why anyone would think they need to go any faster. It's almost equivalent to arguing about a 100MPH limit on the highways. As that restaurant guy will surely tell you after he reviews all of my posts for the past ten years and writes up a summary about me, I'm generally all in favor of personal rights, but I'd never side with people arguing that a 100MPH highway speed limit is too low. So how did I get myself to where I was agreeing that a 45MPH lake limit was too low?
FJ

[winnilaker]

Well, the response has exceed my expectations. Thanks for all the emails, I hope I was able to respond to all of them. As restauranteer mentioned, NHRBA is registered, legit and plans to make a difference in New Hampshire boating.

Look forward to meeting all that emailed me. And the group that started this looks forward to your help to promote boating safety and equal boating rights.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

I checked out this NHRBA site... And all of the members list "Partying" as one of their primary interests FJ

That's funny, I've gone back and read & re-read everything on that site a number of times now, and I can't find any reference to "partying", as you have claimed.

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

As that restaurant guy will surely tell you after he reviews all of my posts for the past ten years and writes up a summary about me

Didn't have to go back ten years to find you have a history of inflammatory and just plain, how can I put this delicately, less than truthful posts. But once again, you are entitled to your own opinion and welcomed, I am sure , to try and sway ours. It just isn't polite attempting to accomplish that by being dishonest.

Bon apetit!

[Boater]

I think boaters should organize to protect their interests but let's be honest here, what you are proposing is a group to protect the interests of GFBL boat owners.

If I was in favor of a speed limit or other restrictions I doubt I would be welcome. Since, as someone pointed out, less than 5% of the boats on the lake are the offshore type would the interests of the other 95% small boat owners be properly represented in your group? I doubt it.

Go ahead and fight for your interests, just be honest about who you are representing.

[winnilaker]

I'm perfectly happy going 35-45 mph everywhere I go. And that's incorrect that about not wanting folks who want a speed limit to join. Honestly I think there are circumstances that speed limits make sense. For example, Weirs bay can get a little scary on a Saturday, you have folks going from Meredith to Governor island bridge and Weirs to past Governor's. But putting a lake wide speed limit doesn't seem fair for those who go out to the boards and want to enjoy a boat that's designed to go above 45mph.

But what I don't like is the negative image that is protrayed about boaters that have boats that go fast and that they are the cause of safety concerns. My vision is have group of boaters from all facets, I think through education and communication, a bridge between facts and safety can be crossed with negative image and personal preference. Having a legit organization where the democracy governs its direction should be a good thing.

[winnilaker]

Who I am representing:
Some of my views
I think we need more public access to lakes. What organization currently fights for that?
I think the current limit for exhaust level is too high. I wouldn't mind boats being quieter. That should make the GFBL group happy.
I want to make it stricker to get a boating license without proper education. That should make the rental companies happy.
I think its wrong that the state won't allow a local marina to help with the rebate program for its customers. Who's going to fight for that?

I'm not about GFBL and certianly hope the NHRBA is not as well or I will get out.

[Shorline]

I welcome the opportunity for responsible boaters to have proper representation in the legislature. My observation over the past several years has been that there is a vociferous minority of individuals who have latched on to certain legislatures in order to stake their claim to boating on Lake Winnipesauke. A key concern on mine is that the majority of the boating related bills are without any statistical or factual merit backing them up. Presenting a bill based on personal opinion with no safety or environmental hard data behind it is irresponsible, and a waste of our representative’s time. We are all here to share the recreational resource that Lake Winnipesauke has to offer. I am eager to be involved in this organization, to put an end to “boat class” segregation, and discrimination when it comes to legislating who has greater rights to our lake’s use.

[Gonzo]

I just joined NHRBA and recommend those who share views on equal rights for all boaters to join. I'm excited about being able to make a difference with a new young organization like this.

I did check out the organization before joining and was impressed that they had all their paperwork done and are registered with the state.

I personally have been going to the legislative meetings in Concord on the speed limit and rafting bills and voted against them.

I do not have a go fast boat and still I support the efforts of an organization like NHRBA.

I would stongly suggest joining this organization. www.nhrba.com

[WeirsBeachBoater]

After some research, I am going to sign on with the NHRBA. I believe that their intentions are good, and I am all for some representation for all boaters in the state. I spend probably more time than most out on Winni and I have seen infractions caused by every style boat imaginable. The state needs better education and criteria for boaters, this online test is a joke, one family member who is knowledgeable ends up doing the test for the whole family.... Hows that working? Good luck to the NHRBA!!!

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by restauranteer

That's funny, I've gone back and read & re-read everything on that site a number of times now, and I can't find any reference to "partying", as you have claimed.

Resty,
I'm surprised that a guy with your obvious expertise in researching was stifled so easily. You must not have been trying. Perhaps you did not want to find it. I'll see if Don will let me post the profiles of the members. Will you then apologize?
And since you are such a master fact-finder, perhaps you can help me find something;
I have read the state constitution from front to back and have reviewed the statutes several times, but am unable to find any reference whatsoever to this oft-mentioned "right to drive a boat very fast on public waters". I do find numerous places where the right to recreate on and have access to our public waters is mentioned, but no rights to go dangerously fast. Can you help me with this? Seriously. If you can show me where the driving of a boat at any desired speed is defined as a constitutional or lawful right, I will send a fat check into NHBRA.
FJ

[winnilaker]

Section 270:29-a
270:29-a Careless and Negligent Operation of Boats. – Any person who shall operate a power boat upon any waters of the state in a careless and negligent manner or so that the lives and safety of the public are endangered shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

But what I am curious is how you are determining a relationship between NHRBA and a front for a cigarette crowd. I'm collecting all the membership applications so far and the majority are not cigarette(GBFL) owners.

As for Don posting a listing of members, if a list of members has been taken malicioulsy and without consent and posted, may Don find a nice letter from an attorney in his mail.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

270:29-a Careless and Negligent Operation of Boats. – Any person who shall operate a power boat upon any waters of the state in a careless and negligent manner or so that the lives and safety of the public are endangered shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Is this your answer to my request for evidence that driving fast is a right??? Or is this actually one of the statutes that is presently being cited against speeding drivers because the MP has no speed law to cite them with? Isn't this actually one of the very reasons there are presently no statistics on speeding, because there are no measurements even being taken and no laws to cite?

Originally Posted by winnilaker

But what I am curious is how you are determining a relationship between NHRBA and a front for a cigarette crowd. I'm collecting all the membership applications so far and the majority are not cigarette(GBFL) owners.

Just like YOU are not a GFBL owner right now, but what does that have to do with your intentions? Please Erwin, just go back and read your own posts on the other forums. Want me to post them here? And are you implying that, should all these non-GFBL members elect a board that supports HB162, you will go along with that? C'mon. That sounds like the "democracy" you speak of, so if you are man enough to agree to that, please say so, emphatically, on this forum. Then me and all my salmon fishing associates will sign right up and vote ourselves in.

Originally Posted by winnilaker

As for Don posting a listing of members, if a list of members has been taken malicioulsy and without consent and posted, may Don find a nice letter from an attorney in his mail.

Not that I expect Don would want to get dragged into this, but information publicly posted on one site, regardless of intent, can be lawfully reposted on ANY other public site (provided proper credit is given if it contains copyrighted material). Threatening a lawsuit is just silly. Letters from attorneys are cheap (especially, I assume, from attorneys of the caliber you have hired). Any lawyer who would write such a letter without grounds would have to know that it would be brought to the immediate attention of the NH Bar. You should stick to IT, law is not your strong suit.

FJ

[winnilaker]

FAT HACK, I would welcome all boaters and I'll state right here and for everyone to read, that if a boaters organization that encompasses all facets of the boater community, by democracy, votes to side with a speed limit, doesn't mean I won't agree, but if the majority of the recreational boaters decide it would be best, then so be it. I would still rather know that the boaters are pushing through laws then a few people that have problems with the GFBL crowd.

By the way I prefer Custie. Any other information you want from me, my address, kids names etc. I'm not afraid to publish my own info, now a challenge to you to come out from your hiding.

[ApS]

Can't we all...just get along?

— Rodney King

[winnilaker]

Thank you, my point exactly.

[Skip]

Wow, interesting discussion (to say the least ).

My $.02

Is there room for intelligent debate on the possibility of speed limits on public bodies of water in New Hampshire? Of course, but should the debate be solely limited to Lake Winnipesaukee? Should any rational discussion include all public bodies of water and be based on the unique circumstances each presents?

Should the debate also bring all parties to the table, pro and con? Integral to an acceptable outcome also requires substantial input of the law enforcement community, in particular the Marine Patrol. What good is any legislation if not enforceable, whether by design or resistance?

And should we talking about adding more responsibilities to an agency that many agree is completely overwhelmed, or should the first course of action be to address funding and manpower issues within the Department of Safety? Should we first insist on modifying existing law so that it is enforceable before adding additional piecemeal legislation? For example, should the present modest fine schedule be enhanced dramatically, as in the case of motorcycle exhaust violations, to make it financially reckless to not be familiar with present boating requirements?

I am sure the intentions of the legislator that filed HB 162 are honorable. However, way too many questions remain on the table for serious consideration of the legislation as presently held in committee. Quite frankly, if passed in its present state, you will have yet another statute that will be nearly impossible to enforce on a fair and consistent basis given the extremely limited tools the State has to work with. And what good to anyone is yet another law on the books that remains ignored by the public at large?

Too bad this discussion denigrated into personal attacks, there are obviously experienced boaters perusing this site, both pro & con on the issue, that have the ability to come to a rational compromise on this emotional issue. And claims that legislators will vote based on emotions wrought from details of a recent death, or sarcastic allegations that they will follow a money trail, show complete ignorance of how things actually work in Concord.

Most legislators will follow the path of compromise, the solution that will probably make no one individual or group completely happy, but a piece of legislation that everyone can live with.

When reasonable discourse provides reasonable compromise, perhaps time will come for reasonable legislation.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

if the majority of the recreational boaters decide it would be best, then so be it.

Will you be allowing and encouraging GFBL members to each vote "60-70" times like in Tampa? Is that how you guys define "democracy"?

[winnilaker]

to understand the hatred towards me. But I went back and added up all posts for and against the speed limit on the forum. I don't need to give you the actual ratio do I (just look at the poll). If an organization was to form and present a statement based on that ratio, your opinion would be lost in the waves. But if you made me and the other members as party animals wanting nothing more than a free for all on the lake, you could gain support. Does this sound accurate?

I laid it out on the line that I want NHRBA to be legit, real democracy (I don't know what you are referring to in Tampa), communication among all types of boaters.

How about I give you a free membership to join? However a rule for NHRBA will be not hide behind a code name. Want to take me up on that offer?

Let's target bad boaters not bad boats.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

Let's target bad boaters not bad boats.

I define bad boaters as those who drive over 45MPH in the day or 25MPH at night. Let's target them.

I've seen some of the threatening stuff that you guys have been saying about APS, his knees, his children, etc, over on the other sites. You guys might not have to be afraid for your safety as we do when we take a side against you. No way am I telling you where I live. Why do you need to know?

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

FAT HACK, ... I prefer Custie.

And I prefer Jack.

[overlook]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

I'm perfectly happy going 35-45 mph everywhere I go. And that's incorrect that about not wanting folks who want a speed limit to join. Honestly I think there are circumstances that speed limits make sense. For example, Weirs bay can get a little scary on a Saturday, you have folks going from Meredith to Governor island bridge and Weirs to past Governor's. But putting a lake wide speed limit doesn't seem fair for those who go out to the boards and want to enjoy a boat that's designed to go above 45mph.

A possible solution is to have a no wake or headway speed only between Governors and Eagle. I have noticed that the markers have been moved closer. MP has been seen patrolling that area more often than not, most busy days one would have to go headway speed there anyways.
This would be a possible solution that would not discriminate.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by Audiofn

This is about a forum for ALL boaters to voice their concerns.

Jon,
This is also a forum about Winnipesaukee issues. But everytime a GFBL issue comes up anywhere, all you guys from all over the country band together like a swarm of bees. You did it in Tampa. You did it in Ohio. You flood our local forum with your nation-wide opinions. Lake Winnipesaukee is a NH citizen owned water body, and WE, the citizens of NH, should be the only ones deciding its fate, not people from Fort Lauderdale, New Jersey, Canada, Maine, and Massachusetts. By my observation, the VAST majority of these offshore boats bear out-of-NH registrations. NH does not even collect a registration fee from them. We don't even have a count on them. They gas up their 300-gallon tanks on the way up through NJ and leave its MTBE in our water. They buy their weekend's beer and tequila in Connecticut and leave its resulting urine in our water. Except for all the money they spend at the Naswa, they contribute zilch to our economy. They scare away the peaceful tourists that we really want. They scare families off the lake. This is just the best and most convenient playground they could find, and we are maintaining it for them at our expense. They care nothing about this lake except that it has always tolerated their behavior and looked the other way under the mistaken belief that all this was financially beneficial to us. They leave their trash behind knowing we will have it all cleaned up for them by the next weekend. We who really own this lake, the real right-owners here, must dodge them every weekend and tie our boats to our docks to stay out of their way.
Its just time for NH to take back our lake. These guys can just as easily trailer their boats up to a different playground every weekend like Lake George (oh ya, that one is off limits to them now too).
You and Custie can say all you want that "its not the boats, its the behavior", but if you truly cared about restoring order to this lake, you'd agree that something simply has to be done, and this does not target the boats, it targets the behavior. The 150 foot rule and the noise law are jokes. We need to deter these yahoos from trailering their boats up here every weekend. You are either one of them or you are against them. If you don't need to go 70 MPH to enjoy the lake as you say, if you truly care about the rights of others, if you truly care about Lake Winnipesaukee, then stop siding with those **** and hiding behind the "live free or die" argument, and work with the rest of us to fix the huge problem that has destroyed this lake for so many of us...crazily high speeds and the noise that goes hand-in-hand with it. Once the speeding is gone, the idiots will go, the noise they make will go, the danger that they "statistically" have nothing to do with will go, and the good people of NH, like me and supposedly you, can enjoy the lake again in some peace. Would you and Custie honestly feel comfortable sending your parents out in a 21-foot boat to take your kids to get an ice cream on this lake on a July weekend? C'mon!

[codeman671]

Wow, what a statement. Funny thing is that even though I am against a speed limit and do not want to push the GFBL off the lake I do have to agree with some of Fat Jack's statements on this one. I am a property owner on the lake and a NH resident. I do get irritated with people who do not keep their money where they play however I doubt that people would fill their tanks far south of NH with 300 gallons of fuel and trailer the extra 1800-2000lbs of extra weight up instead of filling here. If they do then they probably just spent more gas to get it here and their ignorance shines. I think that is is foolish not to have boats used in NH registered in NH, we should be making money on this and charging out of state rates just like they do with snowmobiles. I think that canning the reciprocity in snowmobile registrations is a good thing.

As far as people from Mass and Maine having a say, well they should. I would guess that there is a large population of properties owned around the lake are owned by people from Mass and Maine, particularly Mass.

I do get frustrated with the noise but honestly find Harleys and other loud bikes to be more irritating and reckless. I would love to see a sound comparison of bikes and GFBL's by one of the more techno-related posters on this site. How many bike accident related deaths happen in the lakes region per year compared to fatalities from boat accidents?

I do not care for the influx of tourists but it does help our economy. I like our state and personally hate it when I have to go south of the border. The last time I made a M-hole statement on here I got thrashed on so I will refrain. There are good people and bad people from south of the border, unfortunately the lakes region seems to pick up a lot of the bad ones who are reckless on land and water. And are just plain rude...

Where I differ is that I do still say it is the people, not the boats. If a 36' baja has an exhaust system that diverts under water instead of out the hull and cruises the lake at 35mph people will still complain.

[winnilaker]

Jack, can you believe it, we agree on something. I don't feel comfortable sending my family out on 21 ft boat on 4th of July weekend. Now my reasons are different.

Too many boats
Too many inexperience boaters
Too many big boats that cause real big wakes, I think the Sophie has the biggest wake, but all the cabin cruisers can also cause big wakes. And when they come through eagle and governors and you have 10 boats trying to fit through from both directions, its down right scary.

I agree with your out of staters comments to some degree.

But in each of those occasions, it not just the GBFL crowd

So yes I agree something has to be done, but I don't support targeting 1 type of boater to cut off first. Because what's next, let's ban of jetskis, then what's after that, ban cabin cruisers and so on and so on..... until the only type of boat left is the type you drive.

Should we limit the number of boats on the lake?
Should we have stricker education?
Should cabin cruisers AND GBLFs be forced to go headway when going between certian areas of the lake that are more dangerous then others.

Can't you see my point? Are you afraid of GBFL boaters only? Was there an occasion and location where it happened? I have to believe that you would be afraid of getting hit by an out of stater doing 40 mph in a 22ft bow rider as well. Or does that not hurt as much, so you can live with it.

I've seen the "You Guys" comment in more than one of your posts. For the record, I'm not one of those guys. I have never threatened anyone and would be P*****D off if any of my friends or members of NHRBA would do that. Check my other site, you obviously know about, I'm about charity and preserving rights for all to enjoy the lake. And do some more research about me personally and see what kind of person I am. There are a few folks around the lake that know me.

Custie

[winnilaker]

Jack,
This may be hard, but in your next post. Make a statement about facts and real situations without calling people idiots, yahoos or whatever else Don had to edit out. There has to be something other than your personal feelings toward that type of boater inorder for any of us to make progress in this discussion. Because idiots, yahoos and ***** can apply to all types of boaters.

The 'Hack' comment was about your intelligent ability to research information. I read through all my posts, I don't believe I negatively called anyone anything, I used sacrasm once. But if I did, shame on me.

And if anyone can read through my posts and determine that what I want to accomplish from NHRBA is not for the best interests for all types of boaters to enjoy the lake, please post and let me know, so that I can clarify it.

I do have one confession, NHRBA was designed for all New hampshire boaters not just lake Winnipesaukee, so if that's a conflict, let me know and we'll work through how to change its charter such that Lake Winnipesaukee boaters are well represented when voting on Lake Winnipesaukee issues.

And lastly I don't want NHRBA to be a GFBL focused membership. If you all feel it would be impossible to create an organization that can have constructive communication to solve real boating issues, then I will send all the membership fees back, kill NHRBA and then just use my own network of boating friends to push and fight my personal objectives.

Later,
Custie

p.s. And after I thought about, I don't want your address or who you are. I have received too many emails wanting to know who this Fat Jack guy is and how he is really making them mad and I don't want the burden on my shoulders.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

There has to be something other than your personal feelings toward that type of boater in order for any of us to make progress in this discussion.

Again, It is not the boats or the boaters...IT IS THE BEHAVIOR. I thought you guys were being insincere, but now I feel that you just do not believe me when I say that.
I honestly only have two complaints about conditions on this lake these days (besides lawns); high speeds and loud noise. I have a problem with these whether they eminate from a GFBL boat , from a canoe, or from the Mount. I have the same problem with them whether the driver is a 25 year old man or an eighty year old lady. It is not the boats or the boaters...IT IS THE BEHAVIOR.
The noise problem is never going to be solved by any direct attempt to do so. No noise ordinance is ever going to be truly enforceable or properly applied. We can only hope that some other factor causes the noise to go away. In fact, I believe that the noise statutes only got through without this type of battle because the loud crowd knew it was going to be a joke and was never really going to have an impact on them. They were right.
But high speed is the thing that can and must be controlled to some reasonable degree.
Barrett's contention that "no speed is too high for this lake under the right conditions" did nothing except discredit him and show him for the bag man he really is. His position that marine speed limits are unenforceable just shows his incompetence. Why are other enforcement agencies around the country able to adequately enforce speed limits on hundreds of other lakes while his crew is not able to do so here? Is he admitting that is "hire the college kid for the summer" program does not work?
Of course there is a speed that is too high for this lake. But what is it? What speed lets go-fast people have a REASONABLE degree of fun while letting the vast majority of the citizens still feel safe? I think 45 is a good start. You might feel it is too low. But no progress is going to be made as long as you take the wild position that no speed is too high. At least WE have brought something to the table for discussion.
And controlling speed will inadvertantly and beneficially control the noise problem too. The boats that are designed or altered for speed are the same boats that are making all of the noise. One does not need to be anti-GFBL biased to make that observation. Canoes are not making the noise on this lake. Once the speeding stops, the noise will be gone.
I grew up in the city and moved here to escape all the noise. The noise law is a joke, does not work, and can never be made to work. Lake George Marine Patrol says their identical and unenforcable noise statute became moot once their speed limit started because the noise went away with the speed. Think about it...ALL of the boat noise comes from the boats that are either speeding or accelerating towards high speed. Any boat going 45 or lower (even GFBL's) is going to be reasonably quiet. HB162 will thereby virtually eliminate Winnipesaukee's noise problems.
THE GFBL boats are still using Lake George according to their MP (although I don't understand why), but they are going slower and are quieter. I appreciate a beautiful sports car, a fine Harley, and a sleek cigarette boat. Being against high speed and loud noise does not require that you hate these things. You can love nice guns while hating violence. This is not about the boats or the people who drive them. It is about the SPEED the boats are going on this inland freshwater spring-fed mountian lake, and the amount of NOISE they are making as they do so, period.
It is easy to side against the speed limit and pretend you are doing so because you feel it is the first step towards an assault on your personal freedoms. You can join Barrett and pretend that you believe the other laws are sufficient and the immeasurable 150 foot rule is more enforceable than a speed limit. But if you sincerely look at the situation on this lake these days with open and unbiased eyes, and if you truly care about this lake and the majority of the people who would like to enjoy it, you have to agree that the time has come for a reasonable speed limit, and you cannot seriously contend that this bill is about anything other than boats that are going TOO FAST for this lake.
You, Custie, seem to have the influence and intelligence to make this lake better, but you are siding with a bunch of people who feel that lawlessness is bliss. Laws and limitations are not always bad. Rights are not always taken away by laws. Sometimes they are enforced and strengthened, as they would be if we could all work together to come up with a reasonable speed limit for this lake instead of denying that one is needed.

[SIKSUKR]

Custie,I don't know you personally but I do recieve your newsletter e-mails on a regular basis.I've never replied to any of them but I am now moved to in the future.It has appeared you have the best interest in ALL boaters from what I've seen and always worked towards raising money for charities.I believe that when you give someone a platform to speak from their true colors come shining through.That has been confirmed here by a few regular posters I won't single out but I think most know who they are.Sometimes however,I thinks it's best to not engage with these types who love to use "the end of the world" scare tactics to get their point across.It's really hard,but I've tried to stay out of the back and forth arguing on this forum because even if it's well written,it can come off with me looking like a jerk for participating in the mess.Stick to your principles and consider me a supporter of winnilakers. SS

[KonaChick]

I really support the idea of limiting boats on Lake Winni..not size but numbers. One thing we probably all agree on is that there are way too many out there on any given weekend in the summer which makes for MANY close calls and accidents. I know people have reported accidents and close call incidents on the forum in the past but if this forum were devoted to that topic only i bet it would be filled with many different stories on any given day during the summer. Anyway, does anyone have any logical ideas how the number of boats that go into Winni could be limited? Any thoughts?

[winnilaker]

My points have been made.

PROPELLER, Audiofn, FormulaOutlaw, WeirsBeachBoater, restauranteer, Skip, Gonzo, Shorline, SIKSUKR, KonaChick, overlook and the others that sent emails to me and have registered on NHRBA.com look forward to working with you to talk about ideas such as boat limits, out of stater fees for using boats in NH, promoting safety, etc. even speed limits. But it I don't need the stress to check this forum and NHRBA's members only forum for constructive communication.
There's 2 sides, so let it be that way. Behind those you don't know or behind those you can get to know.

See ya. Bash me til I'm blue in the face.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

The noise law is a joke, does not work, and can never be made to work.

I would have to disagree on this. It does work, or at least it did in my case. I was subject to a DB check last year. My average pass was around 84 db vs the 82 db standard. I was surprised considering I had a stock Corsa exhaust, and they are guaranteed to meet all state requirements. I went back to the boathouse, took apart my exhaust, and found I had a couple of broken baffles. Replaced them and did some other work, and voila, retested at 78 db.

What I think we do need is some sort of voluntary db check by the MP. If you think the 82 db limit is too high, propose a change to your state reps (if you're a resident).

Most people, I'm sure, want to be in compliance, but like me, don't realize they aren't, and have no way of knowing.

My message to all is simple, let's try to do some constructive things instead of bashing. Get involved in local boating organizations. I for one belong to two, and probably spend 10 hours a week (in the summer) volunteering my time to boater saftey and education efforts. Like the old Black Panther saying (I know I'm dating myself), you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Pick a side.

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

Does Winnipesaukee and New Hampshire boaters need a non-profit organization that tries and protects the rights for all boaters? Promotes boating safety? Doesn't alienate boaters based on what they choose to use?

I guess this would be a tough one since people have different opinions, but there has to be a majority out there that share some common views. With new laws coming up and with ones that should be introduced, I would think the majority of those boaters need a medium to be well informed of all issues and a medium to express their issues.

There is a non-bias non-profit organization that does work to protect the rights of boaters, promote boating safety and boater education - Lakes Region Sail & Power Squadron. http://www.lrsps.org/. It is the local division of the National United States Power Squadron http://www.usps.org/national/. LRSPS had representation at the recent HB162 in Concord. LRSPS holds Boating Safety classes; perform vessel safety checks around all of New Hampshire's lakes; hold Boat Smart classes to obtain the Boaters Certificates; provide support to local marinas; just to name a few things we do.

Take a cruise of the two websites. If you are interested in becoming a member or if ANY ONE is interested in becoming a member - please let me know and I WILL help you ..

[Von Bongo]

Originally Posted by KonaChick

I really support the idea of limiting boats on Lake Winni..not size but numbers. One thing we probably all agree on is that there are way too many out there on any given weekend in the summer which makes for MANY close calls and accidents.

Welcome to Anylake USA. If you venture to ANY decent lake in the US from Lake of the Ozarks to my home lake of Lake Maloney in Central Nebraska you will find the same complaint (never seen a boat over 24 feet on maloney), heck even in some respects on the Missouri river where I have done some boating. May be new to your lake but not to most others. Not saying it isn't an issue, just saying it's not unique by any means.

What I have found for example is at LOTO if you want to ski on memorial day you do it before 10am or after 8pm, the rest of the day hit a cove, the waterpark, golf course or whatever.

You want to limit boat traffic, limit all infrastructure and waterfront development, if you can't get a burger, build a cabin or get gas on the lake it will really cut down on boat traffic.

[Von Bongo]

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

Once the speeding stops, the noise will be gone.

Interesting comments, my 22 foot stingray will do 60 MPH and with its alpha drive and through prop exhaust makes very little noise. I fail to see a connection of speed and excessive noise. If you want to connect something connect unmuffled exhaust with noise not speed. 2 different issues. I can tell you the Hendrick motor in Jeff Gordon’s Nextel cup car makes a lot of noise at 40 MPH a lot more than my pickup. Main (not only) difference? Muffler. If a boat is traveling at 100 MPH but only produce say 82dbs does that solve your noise problem? Can you live with that?

Playing devils advocate, you don't drive a moped on the interstate. Maybe larger bodies of water need to be reserved for larger or faster boats and smaller lakes for smaller boats. I know numerous smaller lakes here in NE that limit HP or even require electric motors, but it isn't the larger lakes. OR maybe the lake should be closed at certain times of the day to powered vessels of any kind. Then the canoes and sailboats can have their time on it and the power sports people can have their time. Lake of the Ozarks has no daytime speed limit but does at night. In the 2 1/2 years I lived there most problems we had were with alcohol and rental boats/jet ski operators not knowing the rules of the road. On guy parked his 40ft sea ray on the Porta Cima Golf course in the middle of the night. He wasn’t speeding, just drinking and a couple of gals that were not his wife onboard distracted him. Does that mean we ban all Sea-Rays because he parked his boat on the 14th green? Nope we sent him to jail for being an idiot, I am sure his wife also inflicted some monetary pain on him too.

Kind of funny, several years ago the Nebraska Game and Parks were fielding numerous complaints that there were too many canoes on our 22 miles of scenic Niobrara river. Get that too many Canoes!!! Not noise, to many frigging canoes!!!! Now they are complaining that canoes are no longer a problem but inner tube are??? I still go and canoe it twice a year but now we do it on a Sunday instead of Saturday. That way we avoid the crowed. They can still have their fun and we still have ours.

If you want to limit what happens on your lake maybe you should live on a private lake? I am not trying to be an ass either, I considered a lot at Lake Panorama in Central Iowa which is a large private lake. you have to own property to use it, check it out

http://www.lakepanorama.org/memberinfo.html

If you live on a public lake then you should understand that the public gets to use it how they see fit. I don't relish the bass boats at 5:30 AM running up and down the lake but that is part of living on a PUBLIC body of water. If I want to get away from the public I go out to the farm and sit in the middle of the 200 acres and it's real peaceful.

But hey those thoughts are just an opinion..and you know what they say....

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Von Bongo

...Playing devils advocate, you don't drive a moped on the interstate.

And you don’t drive Indy race cars on the Interstate either.

Maybe larger bodies of water need to be reserved for larger or faster boats and smaller lakes for smaller boats. I know numerous smaller lakes here in NE that limit HP or even require electric motors, but it isn't the larger lakes.

There are other large lakes with hp or speed limits. What about the two largest bodies of water in Massachusetts? Quabbin Reservoir has a 25 hp limit and boating is prohibited completely on Wachusett Reservoir. What about Squam Lake (the second largest lake in NH) with a 40 MPH speed limit? What about Lake George, NY, which has a 45MPH speed limit?

If you want to limit what happens on your lake maybe you should live on a private lake? I am not trying to be an ass either, I considered a lot at Lake Panorama in Central Iowa which is a large private lake.

In NH any lake over 10 acres is a public body of water, so that would only leave very small lakes as possible private ones. That’s pretty small for any type of boating. (I cover 15 to 20 miles in my kayak in 3 or 4 hours of paddling.)

If you live on a public lake then you should understand that the public gets to use it how they see fit. I don't relish the bass boats at 5:30 AM running up and down the lake but that is part of living on a PUBLIC body of water. If I want to get away from the public I go out to the farm and sit in the middle of the 200 acres and it's real peaceful.

Having regulations on a lake is not an attempt to “get away from the public”. It’s done so that everyone (or at least as many as possible) can safely enjoy using the lake together. Laws are made (or rather should be made) for the good of the majority.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Von Bongo

...Kind of funny, several years ago the Nebraska Game and Parks were fielding numerous complaints that there were too many canoes on our 22 miles of scenic Niobrara river. Get that too many Canoes!!!

Well Von, you don't have to go that far to make your point. As a matter of fact, every summer just a few miles to the northeast of the big Lake we have a huge boating problem. GFBLs out of control? Loud exhausts at 3 am? Nope, just raucous canoers & tubers raising hell all night long on the Saco River between Conway & Fryeberg. Police being called in all hours of the day & night, and not a single internal combustion engine anywhere to be found!

That's it! Its not the boat, its the operators....gee, where have we heard that before???

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

What about Lake George, NY, which has a 25MPH speed limit?[/size][/font]

I don't know about the other facts , but this is wrong. It's 45 and it's smaller than Winnipesaukee

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Cal

I don't know about the other facts , but this is wrong. It's 45 and it's smaller than Winnipesaukee

Sorry, that was a typo, which I've since corrected. Yes, Lake George is smaller than Winni, but it's still a large lake with a speed limit, which is what we were discussing. My other facts are correct . . . look them up, rather than try to discredit my entire post, do to one typing error.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

And you don’t drive Indy race cars on the Interstate either.

Perhaps not, but you can drive a Corvette C5/C6, Porsche 911, Ferrari F430, etc (all are capable of speeds in excess of 175). An Indy car isn't street legal. A typical performance boat passes all NH requirements.

Your point?

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

And you don’t drive Indy race cars on the Interstate either.

Perhaps not, but you can drive a Corvette C5/C6, Porsche 911, Ferrari F430, etc (all are capable of speeds in excess of 175). An Indy car isn't street legal. A typical performance boat passes all NH requirements.

Your point?

My point was that comparing mopeds on the Interstate to smaller or slower boats on a large lake, isn't all that different from comparing performance boats to an Indy race cars.

And Interstates do have a speed limit, so those performance cars can't legally drive at their top speeds of 175 mph, can they? Notice that the speed limits don't prevent performance cars from driving on them either, any more than a speed limit on Winni would prevent performance boats from still using the lake.

You guys are the ones comparing Winni to the Interstate, even though there's really no valid comparison between the two. Hello? ... one is for high speed transportation and the other is for recreation.

I'm just standing up for paddlers, trying to balance things out here a bit, as this thread has become very one-sided. And my kayak is ocean capable ... it's not a short recreational kayak, but is a 15.5' long, narrow, expensive sea kayak, designed for large bodies of water. I follow the rules, have the proper clothing and equipment, and know how to navagate, using charts and a deck-mounted compass. I resent having my kayak compared to a moped.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

...And Interstates do have a speed limit...Notice that the speed limits don't prevent ... any more than a speed limit on Winni.... Hello? ... one is for high speed

...I follow the rules...

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the webmaster close the thread on speed limits?

Remember, the speed limit bill (HB 162) never even made it out of committee. There will be no more talk of this subject in the legislature until/or at least next year.

Perhaps we should follow their lead and move on from the subject too???

Anyway, your appetite may vary....so....

Bon apetit!

[PROPELLER]

Evenstar, you can't compare Quabbin & Wachusett resevoirs to a lake like Winni, Squam or any other lake that allows public recreation. Quabbin has always had those restrictions ever since the 4 towns were evacuated & the resevoir was created(its manmade) The same is probably true for Wachusett. Cochickewick in North Andover only allows fishing from shore, Massabesic in Auburn allows boating & fishing but no swimming.

The restrictions on those bodies of water & many others are for different reasons other than what we are discussing here. They were never intended to be used for public recreation. That is not a good or fair comparison.

Just because some other lake has a speed limit or some kind of restrictions does not mean it was right, was needed or that it can be compared to Winni. Every lake has its own individual characteristics. Maybe Lake George had a small but powerful group of individuals with disproportionate influence & didn't like GFBL boats & they were successful at getting a speed limit passed. Does not mean it was needed or that it should have passed. Just because Lake Goerge passed a speed limit law does not mean the NH legislature shoudl also. Also Lake George is very narrow & does not have the wide expanse we have in the Broads & this could contribute to making it very congested.

I know I will have alot of disagreement here but in my opinion Winni is not nearly as congested as many posters would lead you to believe. Its my opinion that some people will purposely say congestion is heavy to lend support to the speed limit bill. But I also believe some do not purposely do this, its just that everyones definition of congested is not the same.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

It find it interesting that just about any boating discussion turns into a debate over speed limits on the lake. In reality, we currently have speed limits (albeit subjective ones). Either people are unaware, or choose to be so.

It is unlawfull to:

Overtake another vessel at a distance and speed such that your wake causes danger or damage.

No vessel shall be operated within New Hampshire in a reckless or negligent manner. Examples of reckless or careless operation include: Excessive speed in regulated or congested areas ...

If the above we consistantly enforced, a speed limit would seem redundant.

Just my .02

[PROPELLER]

Paugus, I agree with you. However, in my opinion the reason that is not good enough has been alluded to in the numerous threads & posts on this subject, albeit indirectly.

I believe the speed limit supporters do not like the noise of the GFBL boats & they are not happy with the current noise ordinances so they are using the speed limit bill to hopefully deter owners of GFBL boats from operating on Winni. I guess they figure if they can not go faster than 45 mph they will go somewhere else. However, since enforcement will be a nightmare for various & obvious reasons GFBL owners will probably still come to Winni knowing they will probably not get caught going 60-65 or what ever speed over 45 mph & on the rare occasion they do they will either fight the ticket or pay it, no big deal.

Secondly, I believe the speed limit supporters do not think GFBL boats belong on a pristine, beautiful MT lake. It represents in their mind all the things they came to Winni to get away from. They just don't like them.

I also believe that when people read about all the alleged close calls that are posted here(I believe this is exaggerated) they automatically think that a GFBL boat was involved. There had to be a GFBL boat involved, look how fast they go. When in reality that is not the case.

I think its more about these issues & maybe others than about speed.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Propeller,

Guess you're probably be right. I'm sure it runs much deeper than speed limits.

Interesting though, I can't recall any proposed legislation to reduce the DB level down from the current 82 DB (less than motorcycles). New Hampshire, by the way, has one of the lowest DB requirements of any state. Many states are either at 90 DB or have no limit.

NASBLA see page 25 of the report (interesting reading).

Funny how antique / classic boats (which I love by the way), with straight through exhaust (which typically are allowed to run at 86 DB), sound nostalgic, a performance boat sounds loud

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by restauranteer

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the webmaster close the thread on speed limits?

Hey, I didn't start the speed limit issue in this thread, but was just responding to other posts.

SO GET OFF MY CASE! And stop trying to make me look bad by quoting a chopped up version of my post.

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Pardon, but I don't believe I mentioned you, or anyone else. I was referring to the general trend of this thread and others.

If you re-read my post, I said, "I find it interesting that just about any boating discussion turns into a debate over speed limits on the lake. "

No names were mentioned. Geez, why do you take it personally?

[Von Bongo]

Evanstar your points are well taken and I don't have a dog in this fight, heck you can ban everything from the lake that doesn't have feathers and webbed feet and it will not bother me.

My points really aren't about speed but tolerance to allow people with different ideas of recreation to enjoy a large lake. And also that speed and noise are not as closely related as some lead you to believe, you can address one or the other separately.

In my world (see post #1 for definition of opinion) with large bodies of water, due to the lack of them, I personally think you have to be more tolerant to the general publics usage. Again, I rarely keep my canoe at the cabin at Lake of the Ozarks because that just isn't the place for it. At one time when my parents when down there in the late 30's and early 40's it was but not anymore unless you want to rise early and be on and off the lake before the crowds.

Finally, if a speed limit is imposed (separate from noise) I sell my 38 foot 12,000 lb boat and plod around the lake at 30 MPH in my 39 foot sea ray 30,000 lb boat and we start the discussions about wakes and how cruisers and diesel smoke are killing the lake. Large boat wakes (and condo development) are the issue we are dealing with at Lake of the Ozarks. Some want a size limit, some a displacement limit, me, I just bought a boat that allows me to go out on the lake no matter how rough rather than try to restrict how other people enjoy the lake. If they do ban boats over a certian size, I won't support it but still no problem I'll downsize or bring one of the other boats and sit it on the lift.

I try to respect everyone opinion and go by the platnum rule...

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

Pardon, but I don't believe I mentioned you, or anyone else. I was referring to the general trend of this thread and others.

If you re-read my post, I said, "It find it interesting that just about any boating discussion turns into a debate over speed limits on the lake. "

No names were mentioned. Geez, why do you take it personally?

I was responding only to restauranteer's post, where he quoted me. If you re-read my post, you would see that I quoted him and not you. His post was obviously directed at me.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Evenstar, you can't compare Quabbin & Wachusett resevoirs to a lake like Winni, Squam or any other lake that allows public recreation. ... The restrictions on those bodies of water & many others are for different reasons other than what we are discussing here. They were never intended to be used for public recreation. That is not a good or fair comparison.

My post was a reply only to what Von Bongo wrote

"Maybe larger bodies of water need to be reserved for larger or faster boats and smaller lakes for smaller boats. I know numerous smaller lakes here in NE that limit HP or even require electric motors, but it isn't the larger lakes."

I was just pointing out that there really are other large lakes that do have regulations on hp and/or speed. I do understand that every lake is unique, which is why there are different regulations for different lakes.

I do find it interesting that the two largest lakes in MA have very strick regulations on their use (for whatever reason), yet some of the people who make the most noise against any additional regulations on Winni are from that same state.

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

I do find it interesting that the two largest lakes in MA have very strick regulations on their use (for whatever reason), yet some of the people who make the most noise against any additional regulations on Winni are from that same state.

Perhaps, but I do find it interesting that some of the people making the most noise for additional regulations have never been to Winni:

From your second forum post April 2, 2005:

Originally Posted by Evenstar

The thing is that I haven't even been on Winni yet, but I do plan on exploring it some this year in my kayak. In fact I just got my Bizer chart this morning.

I do believe you are sincere in your opinions, but perhaps a few visits to the Lake this summer and an actual observation of what the true problems may be could lead to a more informed opinion....

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Evenstar, my apologies. The heat must be getting to me

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Von Bongo

Evanstar your points are well taken and I don't have a dog in this fight, heck you can ban everything from the lake that doesn't have feathers and webbed feet and it will not bother me.

I'm not for banning anyone from the lake. I've stated that before, several times. I have nothing against power boats, as long as they obey the boating rules and that they respect my right to use the lake also.

My points really aren't about speed but tolerance to allow people with different ideas of recreation to enjoy a large lake. And also that speed and noise are not as closely related as some lead you to believe, you can address one or the other separately.

How much tolerance am I as a kayaker supposed to have? Am I to just accept that I can't use the main lake, for fear of being run over? All I've tried to say is that I have just as much right to safely use the main lake as anyone. But that right is being taken away. Have I even once complained about noise? I don't like excessive noise, but it's my safety and my right to use the lake that I'm more concerned about.

... I just bought a boat that allows me to go out on the lake no matter how rough rather than try to restrict how other people enjoy the lake.

I also just "bought a boat that allows me to go out on the lake no matter how rough". But my new boat is a 15.5' sea kayak.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

Evenstar, my apologies. The heat must be getting to me

Apology accepted.

[PROPELLER]

Evenstar, did you read my post responding to your comparison of Quabbin & Wachusett resevoir? NO, it is not interesting that those large bodies of water are heavily restricted. Quabbin was manmade in the 1930's specically to provide drinking water to the greater Boston area. There was never any inten tion to use it for a wide range of recreational purposes. Thats true of most drinking water resevoirs that I am familiar with, they are heavily restricted not because of issues like we have at Winni but because they used for completely different purposes.

And NO, your right to use any part of Winni is not being taken away. You may choose not to exercise that right because YOU may not feel safe. That does not mean you are not safe, only that you perceive it is not safe. You already stated in your first post you did not feel safe on a lake that does have a speed limit, so what is to be done next?

[GWC...]

You may find yourself a day late and a dollar short...

[BroadHopper]

I'm joining the NHRBA. Does anyone know when these hearings take place?
http://www.thewmurchannel.com/news/4393470/detail.html

[gtxrider]

How many boats on the lake can do 80-90MPH?

I don't rememeber seeing many boats going over 40MPH its the slow huge crusiers that throw the BIG wakes not the Fountains, Well Crafts, Formulas, Bajas......

You can pass all the laws you want but if they cannot be enforced what good are they?

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Evenstar, did you read my post responding to your comparison of Quabbin & Wachusett resevoir? NO, it is not interesting that those large bodies of water are heavily restricted. Quabbin was manmade in the 1930's specically to provide drinking water to the greater Boston area. There was never any inten tion to use it for a wide range of recreational purposes. Thats true of most drinking water resevoirs that I am familiar with, they are heavily restricted not because of issues like we have at Winni but because they used for completely different purposes.

Yes, I did read your post. I was just trying to avoid an argument, but since you insist, here are some actual facts: Lake Mead and Lake Powell are the two largest man made reservoirs in the United States and they providing drinking water for the residents of Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Los Angeles. Yet they are also used for recreational boating. Dillon Reservoir is also man made and is the largest water storage facility in the Denver Water system. It also allows recreational boating. Lake McConaughy is a manmade reservoir and the largest body of water in the state of Nebraska. And it also allows recreational boating. The list goes on and on. Modesto Reservoir, Loch Lomond Reservoir in CA, and Buffalo Bill Reservoir in WY are more examples.

In fact forty-five states permit recreational boating use on drinking water lakes, rivers and reservoirs. So, the fact is that most man made reservoirs actually do allow recreational boating. You just have to have a more expensive water treatment filtering system to use the water for drinking. And some states only permit boats using MTBE free fuel.

And NO, your right to use any part of Winni is not being taken away. You may choose not to exercise that right because YOU may not feel safe. That does not mean you are not safe, only that you perceive it is not safe. You already stated in your first post you did not feel safe on a lake that does have a speed limit, so what is to be done next?

Is it safe to paddle my kayak across a lake where boats travel back and forth at 75 mph and faster? And some of you on this forum have even admitted that you have trouble seeing kayaks. If you can’t see me until you get close to me, can you guarantee that you’ll be able to avoid me, when you are traveling at 110 feet per second? No you can’t. So this is not something that is just perceived as being unsafe. It is unsafe. And if I cannot safely use the main lake, my rights to kayaking on the main lake have been essentially taken away.

[PROPELLER]

I'm not talking about the 45 states that do allow recreational boating on their resevoirs, I'm talking about the 2 you felt you had to use as a comparison simply because they are the largest in Massachusetts which is totally irrelevant to our topic of discussion here. They are restricted for different reasons.

If boaters keep 150" of distance from you, you are safe. If a boater is going under the proposed 45 mph speed limit & travel too close(inside the 150' required by law) you may not be safe & the speed limit is irrelevant.

And seeing kayakers is only difficult if they do not wear more visible colors which you claim you do so theres no issue there. If you don't its only more difficult to see, that does not mean you can not be seen.

And please don't say you are trying to avoid an argument. You have been heavily involved in the debate for some time now.

[BroadHopper]

I agree with you GTXrider. It is the big cruisers that you have to watch out for. And they also create erosion of the shore line.

Evenstar. Don't tell me you never been awamp by the waves from the big cruisers doing 20 mph. You might as well ban all powerboats from the lake. Including the Mt Washington. I hope you are not one of those damn kayakers that are out after dark without any form of a light. I had my share of those! Lets ban ALL watercraft!

[PROPELLER]

The Citizen article says people are scared to boat on the lake & tourist dollars are being lost. If thats so then how come so many posters on this forum are complaining about the lake being crowded with boaters? I don't see how both can be true. Either the lake is crowded & therefore those boaters are not scared & they are spending tourist dollars or the lake is not crowded & limiting the number of boats as some have suggested is not needed & there are not alot of close calls as others have suggested(just can't be supported if the lake is not crowded). Which is it?

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Evenstar. Don't tell me you never been awamp by the waves from the big cruisers doing 20 mph. You might as well ban all powerboats from the lake. Including the Mt Washington. I hope you are not one of those damn kayakers that are out after dark without any form of a light. I had my share of those! Lets ban ALL watercraft!

Actually I've never been swamped by any large boat that was obeying the NH boating regulations. And I've only been swamped once by a large boat and that boat came way to close to me at a fairly fast speed, so I never had a chance to position my kayak properly. I have a long sea kayak, so the wakes don't bother me unless they are right on top of me. It's high speeds, with the possiblilty of being hit that concerns me.

I don't kayak after dark. And I always carry a waterproof headlamp (with a strobe) just in case I have a major problem which delays me and I happen to end up on a lake after dark.

I've said many times that I'm not out to ban anyone, just that I support regulations that will help make this lake safer for everyone.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

I'm not talking about the 45 states that do allow recreational boating on their resevoirs, I'm talking about the 2 you felt you had to use as a comparison simply because they are the largest in Massachusetts which is totally irrelevant to our topic of discussion here. They are restricted for different reasons.

I responded to Von Bongo's post, where he said "I know numerous smaller lakes here in NE that limit HP or even require electric motors, but it isn't the larger lakes". I gave Quabbin and Wachusett Reservoir, Squam Lakeand Lake George as just some examples of larger lakes that have limits on speed or hp.
Then you stated that "most drinking water resevoirs that I am familiar with, they are heavily restricted not because of issues like we have at Winni but because they used for completely different purposes." And my reply gave the facts that most drinking water supplies are also used for recreational boating. So how are Quabbin and Wachusett Reservoir "totally irrelevant to our topic of discussion here"?

If boaters keep 150" of distance from you, you are safe. If a boater is going under the proposed 45 mph speed limit & travel too close(inside the 150' required by law) you may not be safe & the speed limit is irrelevant.

I've explained this one many times. Apparently you just don't accept my views on this.

And seeing kayakers is only difficult if they do not wear more visible colors which you claim you do so theres no issue there. If you don't its only more difficult to see, that does not mean you can not be seen.

It's been stated by others here that kayaks can be difficult to see, due to the waves, not just because of their colors. If I'm difficult to see, I'm obviously at more risk of being hit by boats that are traveling at a fast speed. Again, this is basic physics.

And please don't say you are trying to avoid an argument. You have been heavily involved in the debate for some time now.

I'm only trying to give the non-powerboat side here, as this thread is a discussion about the possible need of a new boating organization, which would protect the right of all boaters, not just powerboaters. How meaningful is a discussion, if only one side is represented?

The reason that I didn't respond to your other post was that I honestly didn't want to agrue with you. That's the truth. You come across as an argumentive person to me. You give your opinions as gospel, and then just ignore the facts, or try to twist them around when you are proven wrong. Just as you did in your last reply to me. So I'm not going to argue with you. There's a difference between arguing and discussing. You need to learn the difference.

[jarhead]

I'm back , I just find it funny how you can talk about the facts when you have never been to the lake before .

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by jarhead

I'm back , I just find it funny how you can talk about the facts when you have never been to the lake before .

Where did you get the idea that I've never been to Winni? I only live an hour away and I've been to the lake plenty of times. I've just never kayaked on it before ... mostly because I just took up kayaking last spring. My family has been in NH for many generations. My grandparents boated on Winni, when they lived in Laconia.

I presented actual facts, and if you don't believe me, look up what I posted. I didn't make any of that up. I find it funny how some of you try to discredit me, just because you can't out debate me.

This is supposed to be a discussion about a new boater's organization ... for supposedly all boaters, yet it appears that only the views of powerboaters are welcome here.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

I don't kayak after dark. And I always carry a waterproof headlamp (with a strobe) just in case I have a major problem which delays me and I happen to end up on a lake after dark.

Wonder why you never kayak after dark or 1/2 hour before - your kayak lack proper lighting?!

The purpose of this thread is to seek interest in a boating organization that would be representative of a majority of Lake boaters; not a chat room posting for your entertainment.

Please, state your opinion regarding the purpose of this thread and move on to another post. The repetition of your non-thread opining is growing old.

P.S.- Perhaps Concord needs to mandate a masted flag on all kayaks and canoes on the Lake - all the better to see you!

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by GWC...

Please, state your opinion regarding the purpose of this thread and move on to another post. The repetition of your non-thread opining is growing old.

Hey, I was just replying to a post which was directed at me! Am I not permitted to do that? BTW: Proper lighting is available for kayaks, so if I wanted to kayak at night, I would be able to do so legally.

So exacty what does your post have to do with this thread?

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

Does Winnipesaukee and New Hampshire boaters need a non-profit organization that tries and protects the rights for all boaters? Promotes boating safety? Doesn't alienate boaters based on what they choose to use?

I guess this would be a tough one since people have different opinions, but there has to be a majority out there that share some common views. With new laws coming up and with ones that should be introduced, I would think the majority of those boaters need a medium to be well informed of all issues and a medium to express their issues.

Now, start your own thread about kayaking and how long you have been in the Lake region and your improper emergency backup plan if kayaking on the Lake after dark, please, for your sake - your mind is no match for mine.

Again, express your opinion regarding the need for a boating organization in the Lake area, move on, and stop hijacking this thread.

[Woodsy]

I just had to chime in on this one....

Lake Winnipesaukee is a PUBLIC resource, and as such is for everyone to use. Sailboaters, Kayakers, Canoeists, Jetskier, Powerboaters of all types and of course Landowners.

I guess the best solution is to require people to think... and unfortunately you cannot legislate common sense!

If your a Canoeist or Kayaker, and you want to paddle around Winni on a busy holiday weekend, use some common sense, bright colored canoe or kayak and wear a bright colored PFD so that you can be seen. I have on numerous occasions seen people out kayaking in the middle of the Broads in dark colored kayak while wearing a blue or black PFD! You don't go for a walk in the woods during hunting season and wear camoflage!

Not too much to say about the Sailboat crowd... they do seem to enjoy the broads alot when the wind is there... The smaller guys seem to have an attitude, but they are the ones most challenged by overgrown cruiser wakes splashing across thier bows!

JetSki owners are like motorcycle riders. They want to do thier own thing, they are small, fast and highly maneuverable, really don't care too much about rules & regulations as long they get to do thier thing.

The powerboaters really are thier own worst enemy! They all have differing opinions on how the lake should be governed and bicker quite vociferously about it and its all related to what type of boat they operate. The easiest guys to pick on are the GF boaters as they are the most visible of the bunch even though they are a very small minority of the powerboaters on Winnipesaukee. I don't use GFBL because not all go fast boats are loud and obnoxious. The majority of boats on the lake are family type runabouts.

The Landowners are like powerboaters, they all have opinions that relate directly to ownership of property around the lake.

The bottom line is, everyone is entitled to thier opinion. However, no one is entitled to restrict another persons pusuit of happiness. Choice is the operative word. People make thousands of decisions every day of thier lives. The speed limit on the highway is 65mph in SOME spots. I don't think there is anyplace in the country you can exceed 75mph. However, every car sold in this country is capable of exceeding the speed limit by a large margin. Some people don't like minivans (family runabouts), but they sell alot of them. Some like monster SUV's (Big Cruisers), some like hybrids (Kayaks & Sailboats) some like Convertibles (Jetskis) and some like exotic sports cars (Go fast boats). All of these vehicles, when driven properly provide safe, fun transportation and entertainment. They key is when DRIVEN PROPERLY! Its not so much the car or boat, but it is the manner in which it is operated!

a Speed Limit on Winnipesaukee is not a solution to any of the issues on the lake. It really only affects the go-fast boaters, who are a very small minority. At the hearing, the chief officer in charge of the Marine Patrol spoke AGAINST a speed limit, citing among other reasons, the lack of any empirical or statistical data showing speed was a consistent factor in boating accidents on the lake, the logistics of enforcing the limit, not limited to but including, costs in upgrading equipment (a simple police radar will not work there is a whole list of techinical reasons but I will save that for another post), increased manpower, and the new certificate program now in place.

Some here have mentioned Lake George, NY as a model lake with a speed limit. Lake George is nothing like Winnipesaukee. First off, most of the shoreline and all of the islands are owned by the State of NY. There are very few private residences on the water as compared to Winnipesaukee! The speed limit on Lake George is not enforced, although it is on the books, and is mostly cited in cases where alcohol intoxication and boating have mixed poorly.

We have enough rules and regulations on the books now. We need better driver education, and better enforcement of existing rules regarding boating safety.

Woodsy

[restauranteer]

Originally Posted by Evenstar

...I presented actual facts, and if you don't believe me, look up what I posted. I didn't make any of that up...

Hmmmm,

My dictionary defines fact as knowledge or information based on actual occurrences.

By your own admission you have never boated on the Lake. You also state that you have even only recently taken up kayaking.

Your passion in your opinion is appreciated. Confusing fact with opinion, while not uncommon in this thread, is not condusive to supporting your main argument, however.

My suggestion? Pack a nice picnic lunch on your first kayak experience to Winni. And enjoy, the Lake is much more safe and enjoyable then you have been misled to believe!

Bon appetit!

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by GWC...

Now, start your own thread about kayaking and how long you have been in the Lake region and your improper emergency backup plan if kayaking on the Lake after dark, please, for your sake - your mind is no match for mine.

Again, express your opinion regarding the need for a boating organization in the Lake area, move on, and stop hijacking this thread.

How am I hijacking this thread? My first post in this thread was in response to a post that suggested that smaller and slower boats not be allowed on a large lake. Every other post that I've made in this thread (including this one) has been to reply to posts that were directed at me. Some of those posts contained misinformation about me and what I had written.

For a thread supposedly about an organization to "represent all boaters", you guys have repeatedly insulted me and all paddlers.

And when I stand up for myself, I'm attacked for my "opinions", even though I'm one of the few people here who has even bothered to post actual facts.

So what am I doing wrong? I won't be bullied out of this or any other discussion, just because my views are different from the majority. I have just as much right to post here as any other member of this forum.

As far as my "improper emergency backup plan", according to the NH boating regulations, "Vessels that are paddled, poled, or rowed require only an all-around white light." Mine even flashes. I never intend to be out on any lake at night (and I never have been), so technically I don't have to have any lighting at all, but I still carry emergency lighting. Yet you actually criticized me for doing so, and then have the nerve to post: "please, for your sake - your mind is no match for mine". How arrogant!

If you don't want me to reply, then stop directing posts at me.

[PROPELLER]

Evenstar, It is too bad this thread deteriorated into a debate about the speed limit. That was not the intention of Winnilaker. You & I as well as many others participated & we are all to blame. Having said that, please don't paint me as argumenative when you have participated equally in this debate. Have you heard the saying "it takes two to tango".

I state my opinions just like YOU & everyone else on this forum & my opinions do not come across as gospel anymore than YOURS or anyone else. So please do not paint yourself as the innocent bystander who has been attacked.

Quabbin & Wachusett resevoirs in my opinion were not relevant(I have already stated why SEVERAL times so I won't repeat it) If you do not understand why then I can't help you. Its been clearly stated.

You keep saying you are stating facts. I listened to a host on an AM talk show this AM praise a guest host for having conviction for his opinions & then backing them up with factual, DOCUMENTED evidence. Not emotion, feelings, rumors & innuendo. This is what I see the speed limit supporters & WinnFABS using to support HB162, EMOTION, FEELINGS, RUMORS & INNUENDO. I do not see any factual, empirical, documented evidence on Lake Winnipesaukee to show that speed is a problem.

As far as your post stating you were only responding to a post directed at you, if you read your first post on this thread you were not responding to a post directed at YOU. Von Bongo did not direct the post to you, he was not putting down paddlers. You chose to enter the debate on your own.

I respect everyones right to have an opinion. But no I do not always accept everyones view. If you want people to just accept what you say without question that sounds like GOSPEL to me. Apparently you do not accept some of my views as well as others on this forum. Thats ok, your entitled but don't expect your views to go unchallenged.

P.S. You don't need to highlight my posts when responding. I know what I wrote.

[BroadHopper]

Obviously no one is jumping on the bandwagon with Evenstar. He can't lead and certainly can't follow us. He must get out of the way.

I reccomend to the Webmaster that this thread be close.

[Evenstar]

Propeller, even though several things that you wrote are totally wrong (Please read what I and others actually wrote in this thread), this time I am not going to agrue with you. I'm really not here to argue, but to present a non-powerboat viewpoint.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Obviously no one is jumping on the bandwagon with Evenstar. He can't lead and certainly can't follow us. He must get out of the way.

Of course no one is backing me up, as most of you are powerboaters.

I'm not trying to lead and I certainly don't wish to follow anyone with your additude. But I'm not getting out of the way either.

BTW: I'm a she.

[Seaplane Pilot]

This speed limit is total rubbish. More evidence that the liberals are trying to help us decide what's best for ourselves. I'm the latest member to join NHRBA in hopes that we can stop this speed limit mess - I'll do whatever I can to help. We are not living as we did 50 years ago - why should we expect the lake to be as it was 50 years ago. If you don't like it, move to northern Maine. It's never going to change.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

That was not the intention of Winnilaker.

Do you really think that was not his intention? Do you really believe that NHRBA is a "boating safety" association and was founded for the good of "all boaters"? Was it the image of the sail boat on the home page that fooled you? Do you really think that Custie is not using NHRBA solely as a mechanism to fight the speed limit bill? Do you really think NHRBA is not just a poorly disguised derivative of the Offshore Only and Winnilaker groups? Are you one of those who donated money under the belief that this was not an offshore boaters group? Where did you expect this thread to go? Seems to me that any mention of NHRBA or post from Winnilaker is going to immediately subject a thread into becoming a speed limit discussion. You have been on the other forums, so you surely know the reasons for that.
Hopefully, now that the bill has expired, we can go back to discussing other issues. Too bad it requires two years before we can resubmit a bill, but you can be sure that it will be submitted as soon as it is possible. By then, there will likely be a few new "incidents" to fuel the debate. Till then, let's talk about something else.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

More evidence that the liberals are trying to help us decide what's best for ourselves.

You are calling us the "liberals"? I'm no liberal. All this time, we were thinking that you guys were the "liberals", claiming that a speed limit would be a violation of your civil rights and was just another attempt by the "fat cat" lakefront owners to claim ownership of the water. If you think this is a "liberal/conservative" issue and you are not a "liberal", you probably should be on our side.

[jarhead]

You posted that you had never boated on the lake , that was a direct quote. This thread was not about SL or wether or not you feel safe on the lake or not , and how would you know having not been out there,it was about an organization that looks out for the rights of all boaters not yours not mine but all ! Start a new thread if you want about any other topic and discuss it there . But do me one favor and base it on facts not assumptions, opinions or the ramblings of APS and FAT JACK.And as restauranteer said head out on the lake and you will find it more beautifull and alot less dangerous than others may lead you to beleive.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by jarhead

You posted that you had never boated on the lake , that was a direct quote. This thread was not about SL or wether or not you feel safe on the lake or not , and how would you know having not been out there,it was about an organization that looks out for the rights of all boaters not yours not mine but all ! Start a new thread if you want about any other topic and discuss it there . But do me one favor and base it on facts not assumptions, opinions or the ramblings of APS and FAT JACK.And as restauranteer said head out on the lake and you will find it more beautifull and alot less dangerous than others may lead you to beleive.

But you originally wrote "you have never been to the lake before ." That was what I was responding to. Like I explained, I have been to the lake many times, I just haven't been on it in my kayak yet.

Hey, I didn't start any of the disscusions on speed limits ... I just responded to what others had posted here, most of which was directed at me personally. Why aren't you directing your complaints to the ones that actually started the speed limit and other issues here? I certainly have a right to reply to any posts that are directed at me.

Why is it that the views of a kayaker aren't welcome here, if this is actually a thread about "an organization that looks out for the rights of all boaters"? The truth is that this is another powerboater only thread, so other views aren't welcome. That's pretty obvious to me.

Read my posts. I have more facts in my posts than anyone else does in this entire thread.

Goodness, restauranteer doesn't even own a boat, so what does he know about kayaking on Winni! The ower of the kayak shop where I bought my kayak has a family camp on Winni. She's a certified instructor and an expert kayaker. I was just at her store and she told that going out on the main lake during the summer in a kayak is not at all safe. She says that it is a very dangerous lake for kayaks, due to the high speeds of some of the powerboats. This woman is an expert, and knows the lake very well.

[PROPELLER]

No Fat Jack, I do not believe it was Winnilakers intention for this thread to be about the speed limit bill specifically. He only asked if there needed to be a non-profit organization that represents all boaters. Thats it.

And no, its not clear to me at this time that it is a front for high performance boats or that the organization was created specifically to fight the speed limit.

One thing is clear to me though & they don't deny it. In fact it says it on their website. WinnFABS was created specifically to support the speed limit bill. Its obvious to me that WinnFABS does not represent a broad spectrum of boaters. Did you donate money to them thinking they have all boaters interests at heart?

At least Winnilaker has expressed an interest in some kind of regulation. He points out that areas of the lake are congested & would benefit from some kind of speed limit. Winnilaker also expressed that while 45mph maybe too low, a higher speed limit may be acceptable. Has WinnFABS kept an open mind? Not that I am aware of.

It would be difficult for any boating organization to represent speed limit supporters & opponents. So if I decide to join one I will pick one that keeps an open mind & would consider compromise.

And no, I have not donated money to NHRBA yet but I am seriously thinking about. I can do my own research & make my own decisions. I don't need your help, thanks anyway.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

And no, its not clear to me at this time that it is a front for high performance boats or that the organization was created specifically to fight the speed limit.

Want to buy a bridge?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

WinnFABS was created specifically to support the speed limit bill.

Exactly as they say they were. Let there be no confusion about that. Are you implying that they are pretending they were formed for some other purpose the way NHRBA is?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Did you donate money to them thinking they have all boaters interests at heart?

I gave $5000 because I want to help them get HB162 passed. Period. To me, this has nothing to do with "other boaters interests".

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

At least Winnilaker has expressed an interest in some kind of regulation.

You don't consider HB162 to be "some kind of regulation"? You consider the no-rules status that Custie is promoting to be "some kind of regulation"? Want to buy two bridges?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

Has WinnFABS kept an open mind? Not that I am aware of.

Winnfabs is trying to make the lake accessible to ALL boaters, 21-footers, sailboats, water-skiers, canoes, sunfishes, kayaks, rowing skulls, salmon fishermen, etc. They just want them ALL to operate at a safe speed. This is what an "open minded" person would see as an "open minded " approach. As I've said before, at least Winnfabs has taken the constructive first step and brought a bill forward. Isn't it now the other side's turn to make a counter-proposal? Is saying "no way" your idea of compromising? Is it Winnfab's job to make the initial proposal, then to next make a counter-proposal to their own bill? What business school teaches this form of negotiating? You feel that maintaining the "let the strongest survive" atmosphere, which forces most of NH's citizens off the lake for the benefit of the dominant few (who mostly come from out-of-state, BTW) is "open minded"? Want to buy yet another bridge?

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

It would be difficult for any boating organization to represent speed limit supporters & opponents. So if I decide to join one I will pick one that keeps an open mind & would consider compromise.

And we will surely forgive and welcome you, because that's the kind of "open minded" group that we are.

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

And no, I have not donated money to NHRBA yet.

Finally, a logical decision, (But not a surprising one).

Originally Posted by PROPELLER

I can do my own research & make my own decisions. I don't need your help, thanks anyway..

Let me know if you do need my help. I am always willing.

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

that's incorrect that about not wanting folks who want a speed limit to join...My vision is have group of boaters from all facets...Having a legit organization where the democracy governs its direction should be a good thing.

Custie,
I have joined NHRBA. I hope what you say above is true and that you will indeed give equal billing to voices from all sides. I will, of course be advocating passionately FOR a speed limit and recruiting to NHRBA people who support the same. I expect that many members from Winnfabs will join me. I hope that we will be able to take part in the democratic process you describe and can be involved in the board elections. In fact, if the associate is truly set up for the purpose you describe, we actually share the same goals. We look forward to the May 6 strategy session with Director Barrett, and I have already contacted a reporter about joining us. I will hopefully bring a radar gun that was designed specifically for marine use and that has been used effectively by hundreds of marine patrol agencies across the country. I have even been speaking with another agency about coming here to teach our MP how to accurately measure boat speeds. I agree that the key here is education. We need to educate as many NH citizens as possible about how they can participate in this issue and make their opinions known. And we need to educate our MP on the success of speed limit laws and high conviction rates on other lakes. All I ask is that we limit participation in this process to actual NH citizens and keep the Floridians, Californians, and Missourans out of our affairs. I'm sure you will agree that this is the business of the citizens of NH.
Also, as a prerequisite to registering for your site, I had to provide my personal information. I trust that will not be released to anyone.
I look forward to working with you.
Frank

[Tyler]

I think you will find a bunch of good folks over at NHRBA, I am also a member and will gladly listen to your thoughts on a speed limit as I am sure all will. For the meeting on May 6th along with the hardware and other items you indicated you will bring might I suggest you bring any data you have that shows a speed limit is needed on Winnipesaukee, not some other body of water elsewhere, Lake Winnipesaukee. To be quite frank I do not think you or anyone else will get very far with Mr. Barrett or our legislature if you do not provide facts, not emotion on this LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE issue. Look forward to it.

[frank m.]

Tyler,
In fact, all that information and data is already there, right in MP's files. It's just a matter of getting him to look for it. Mr. Barrett is a very intelligent fellow, I have dealt with him before. I'm sure that once he sees we are all working together he will be more than agreeable to cooperate with us. For instance, we can point out the two accidents last year involving boats travelling alone at high speed and losing control on Winnipesaukee. The information is all right in MP's files, but they have had these accidents mis-filed as "operator error" because there was no speeding violation to cite at that time. That's why the Director mistakenly said there have not been any recent speed-related accidents. All we have to do is show him where to find them. Every year has had at least a few accidents like this. I will print out articles from the Citizen's on-line archives and when we get there we can dig out the relevant MP files to show him how many speed-related incidents have been mis-categorized. I appreciate your cooperation with this and look forward to working with you.
Frank

[pm203]

Instead of focusing on the speed issue,why dont you focus on PWC and other dangerous uneducated boaters on the lake.National and local statistics do not back up speed as an issue.Plus,with the majority of marina and business owners opposing a speed limit,your chance of getting a speed limit law passed is futile to none.Lets wake up and put the focus where it should be.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I just had to chime in on this one....

Lake Winnipesaukee is a PUBLIC resource, and as such is for everyone to use. Sailboaters, Kayakers, Canoeists, Jetskier, Powerboaters of all types and of course Landowners.

I guess the best solution is to require people to think... and unfortunately you cannot legislate common sense!

If your a Canoeist or Kayaker, and you want to paddle around Winni on a busy holiday weekend, use some common sense, bright colored canoe or kayak and wear a bright colored PFD so that you can be seen. I have on numerous occasions seen people out kayaking in the middle of the Broads in dark colored kayak while wearing a blue or black PFD! You don't go for a walk in the woods during hunting season and wear camoflage!

Not too much to say about the Sailboat crowd... they do seem to enjoy the broads alot when the wind is there... The smaller guys seem to have an attitude, but they are the ones most challenged by overgrown cruiser wakes splashing across thier bows!

JetSki owners are like motorcycle riders. They want to do thier own thing, they are small, fast and highly maneuverable, really don't care too much about rules & regulations as long they get to do thier thing.

The powerboaters really are thier own worst enemy! They all have differing opinions on how the lake should be governed and bicker quite vociferously about it and its all related to what type of boat they operate. The easiest guys to pick on are the GF boaters as they are the most visible of the bunch even though they are a very small minority of the powerboaters on Winnipesaukee. I don't use GFBL because not all go fast boats are loud and obnoxious. The majority of boats on the lake are family type runabouts.

The Landowners are like powerboaters, they all have opinions that relate directly to ownership of property around the lake.

The bottom line is, everyone is entitled to thier opinion. However, no one is entitled to restrict another persons pusuit of happiness. Choice is the operative word. People make thousands of decisions every day of thier lives. The speed limit on the highway is 65mph in SOME spots. I don't think there is anyplace in the country you can exceed 75mph. However, every car sold in this country is capable of exceeding the speed limit by a large margin. Some people don't like minivans (family runabouts), but they sell alot of them. Some like monster SUV's (Big Cruisers), some like hybrids (Kayaks & Sailboats) some like Convertibles (Jetskis) and some like exotic sports cars (Go fast boats). All of these vehicles, when driven properly provide safe, fun transportation and entertainment. They key is when DRIVEN PROPERLY! Its not so much the car or boat, but it is the manner in which it is operated!

a Speed Limit on Winnipesaukee is not a solution to any of the issues on the lake. It really only affects the go-fast boaters, who are a very small minority. At the hearing, the chief officer in charge of the Marine Patrol spoke AGAINST a speed limit, citing among other reasons, the lack of any empirical or statistical data showing speed was a consistent factor in boating accidents on the lake, the logistics of enforcing the limit, not limited to but including, costs in upgrading equipment (a simple police radar will not work there is a whole list of techinical reasons but I will save that for another post), increased manpower, and the new certificate program now in place.

Some here have mentioned Lake George, NY as a model lake with a speed limit. Lake George is nothing like Winnipesaukee. First off, most of the shoreline and all of the islands are owned by the State of NY. There are very few private residences on the water as compared to Winnipesaukee! The speed limit on Lake George is not enforced, although it is on the books, and is mostly cited in cases where alcohol intoxication and boating have mixed poorly.

We have enough rules and regulations on the books now. We need better driver education, and better enforcement of existing rules regarding boating safety.

Woodsy

If only everyone was as rational as you!Well said!

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by winnilaker

I would welcome all boaters.

Custie,
As explained in my earlier response, I have joined NHRBA. But despite my most gracious efforts to begin a civilized dialogue and work towards the kind of compromise you describe, I am not being made to feel very "welcomed".

First, one of my posts from this forum, seeking support for the Black Cove loons, was posted and framed as if one cannot be a member if he cares about loons. For soem reason I just do not get, it was supposed to make the remaining members "aware" of my "anti-cause" background, headed "Read & heed:"

Additionally, there is outright hostility towards me and any discussiion with me;
"I am done discussing this with you on this or any other site, ",
"Be part of the team, not the problem. "
"you are way out of line suggesting only NH citizens be allowed to decide this"

And several statements are clearly aimed to intimidate;
"You've joined the wrong group",
"I will enjoy meeting you and carrying on this debate face to face!"
"see you on the 6th"

And your silence during all this is deafening.

It has only been a few hours since I joined, and it is becoming clear that this might not be the open association you think it is. Please help. I sincerely want to cooperate with you on this. Are these members representative of the rest? Is this really an association where all boaters are welcome?
frank m.

[Cal]

Frank,
I believe one of those accidents involved an operator who was seen doing figure eights at high speed...that is operator error or more so operator ignorance or foolishness. The same could have happened at a lower speed of say 45 mph.