Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > General Discussion
Home Forums Gallery Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Links Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-22-2020, 01:39 PM   #101
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,013
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 224
Thanked 642 Times in 473 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
Of course, sailboats and kayaks, etc without motors get all these benefits of improved lakes, launch ramps, MP, navaids for free.
Is not totally true for sailboats because a sailboat 12' length or more, without a motor, pays a registration fee, starting at about $40/yr.

With no motor, and 12' to 16' sail boat length, the hull id bow numbers are optional and just the colored sticker is required without the hull registration numbers on the bow. So, a 14' Sunfish pays about $40/yr and needs to have just the two colored bow stickers for the year.

An 11'10" sailboat with no motor pays no fee ...... and I have one ..... a CL- Echo!!! .....

The rudder and rudder holder brackets, aka the gudgeons and pintles, are NOT included when measuring the sail boat length. Is only the hull, itself.
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!

Last edited by fatlazyless; 09-26-2020 at 08:32 AM.
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to fatlazyless For This Useful Post:
ApS (09-23-2020)
Old 09-22-2020, 03:42 PM   #102
mswlogo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 126
Thanks: 60
Thanked 40 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingScot View Post
This is a great point. From another angle--if we were following 1950's practices with 2020 population of people and boats, the lake would be an environmental disaster.

We need to improve our environmental practices as we expand, or we'll lose the lake.
Exactly. It's a tough challenge.
mswlogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2020, 04:45 AM   #103
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,983
Thanks: 1,375
Thanked 578 Times in 406 Posts
Question Don't Even Swim in The Water...What's Next in Toxic Life-Forms?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mswlogo View Post
True.

But the tiny cabin near the waters edge that is 80 years old without an updated septic probably pollutes more than the McMansion with a properly installed septic.

Or the old tiny 2 cycle 1960 Johnson outboard probably pollutes more than the dual V8 cigarette boat.

Don't assume size is all that matters.

But the bulk of the pollution is runoff. I'm not saying the others things are not worth monitoring and finding solutions for.

My point is some folks seem to think if we were back in the 1950's mentality all the pollution would not exist. Most of the pollution today is due to the practices back from the 1950's. And if we were as strict today back then the lakes would be in better shape.
Cabins rarely achieve an age of 50 years on Winter Harbor.

One near me was 50 years old, and was just torn down last week. Some local tear-downs had concrete basements!

The former will become a McMansion, built beside a Mega-McMansion with three fireplaces. They advertise for summer renters saying it will support five families!

Before we built here, a woodsman "harvested" every marketable White Pine tree on our acre. As a result, eroding boat wakes are slowly sliding our entire lot into the lake!

A few large Maple trees were left (showing the maple "taps" when used for maple syrup in the 1940s-1950s).

But the largest trees left behind were Eastern Hemlock, which have no redeeming value; that is, besides providing shade.

Anyway, I noticed that our Eastern Hemlock needle "duff" was being crushed into mud by repeated hammerings of boat wakes: Where there used to be sand, this shoreline now has deep soggy soil pockets that can trip you up.

New weeds (to this area) have taken root. Could these changes introduce new single-cell life-forms to Lake Winnipesaukee?

We know the lake has giardia, gleoetrichia, and blue-green bacteria at present. What other life-forms can present a fourth toxic menace? We've read about it happening elsewhere:

https://nypost.com/2020/09/23/amoeba...n-into-liquid/
ApS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2020, 09:11 AM   #104
XCR-700
Senior Member
 
XCR-700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andover, MA
Posts: 673
Thanks: 346
Thanked 225 Times in 126 Posts
Exclamation

As a complete outsider and non-resident "the Winnipesaukee pollution Problem" as one poster put it seems like it is not one problem, but several complaints/concerns.
  1. Is the lake clean enough to swim in, given all the concerns about people using it for their personal bathroom and other medical issues raised?
  2. Can you use the lake water to drink from without significant levels of treatment?
  3. Can the lake water be even better with restrictions, fines, increased boat registration fees?
  4. Can the lake water be even better with home owner restrictions, changes in practices, and less waterfront homes?

Well for issue #1 I hope so, given how many swim in the lake every year, but in truth the bulk of that activity occurs for maybe 10 - 12 weeks at best, and the peek maybe as little as 4 - 6 weeks. So, it really begs the question of people on/in the water having a long-lasting impact. MAYBE for a short time, but it seems unlikely a lasting impact comes from people on/in the water.

Issue #2 probably looks very different to an outsider, there is no way I am configuring my drinking water to come from any body of water near a population without significant filtration, and even then I might still opt for a well. Is it really so costly to drill a well right next to a lake? Given that the houses we are talking about are often now valued over a million dollars and maybe much more, is the cost of a well and a treatment system even significant?

For issue #3, the cynic in me says no amount of increased cost or fines or fees or fuel tax will change whats going on. In the 21st century people seem to have unlimited spending power for what they want, even if its on borrowed money. I think the gas guzzler tax vs the electric car government incentives is a perfect example of a total failure and sham perpetrated on the tax payers. Americans want big powerful boats, trucks, and SUV's, and no financial program is changing that, not even when gas hit $4.00+/gal. Any change in usage will need to come from a different base than increased cost.

And sadly issue #4 is similar, you folks who live there and voice concern are also the ones who have the power to change this now. Give up lawns, stop clearing and maintaining your lots, move away and turn your property into conservation land. Ya, not even close to realistic. Pretty much the same as issue #3. People want what they want, and somehow feel their presence on the planet is not a contributing factor to these concerns, its always the other guy who is doing something more harmful that is the real problem.

I have NO answers is any of this and in truth believe the planet is here for us to use. Not abuse, but use. And based on what I see (not hear) most of you believe the same thing, or you would live in cities and just look at webcam images of Winnipesaukee so as to not impact it in any way.

Well this should be more than enough to get me pulverized in responses,,,
XCR-700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2020, 10:22 AM   #105
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 1,057
Thanks: 618
Thanked 451 Times in 269 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
As a complete outsider and non-resident "the Winnipesaukee pollution Problem" as one poster put it seems like it is not one problem, but several complaints/concerns.
  1. Is the lake clean enough to swim in, given all the concerns about people using it for their personal bathroom and other medical issues raised?
  2. Can you use the lake water to drink from without significant levels of treatment?
  3. Can the lake water be even better with restrictions, fines, increased boat registration fees?
  4. Can the lake water be even better with home owner restrictions, changes in practices, and less waterfront homes?

Well for issue #1 I hope so, given how many swim in the lake every year, but in truth the bulk of that activity occurs for maybe 10 - 12 weeks at best, and the peek maybe as little as 4 - 6 weeks. So, it really begs the question of people on/in the water having a long-lasting impact. MAYBE for a short time, but it seems unlikely a lasting impact comes from people on/in the water.

Issue #2 probably looks very different to an outsider, there is no way I am configuring my drinking water to come from any body of water near a population without significant filtration, and even then I might still opt for a well. Is it really so costly to drill a well right next to a lake? Given that the houses we are talking about are often now valued over a million dollars and maybe much more, is the cost of a well and a treatment system even significant?

For issue #3, the cynic in me says no amount of increased cost or fines or fees or fuel tax will change whats going on. In the 21st century people seem to have unlimited spending power for what they want, even if its on borrowed money. I think the gas guzzler tax vs the electric car government incentives is a perfect example of a total failure and sham perpetrated on the tax payers. Americans want big powerful boats, trucks, and SUV's, and no financial program is changing that, not even when gas hit $4.00+/gal. Any change in usage will need to come from a different base than increased cost.

And sadly issue #4 is similar, you folks who live there and voice concern are also the ones who have the power to change this now. Give up lawns, stop clearing and maintaining your lots, move away and turn your property into conservation land. Ya, not even close to realistic. Pretty much the same as issue #3. People want what they want, and somehow feel their presence on the planet is not a contributing factor to these concerns, its always the other guy who is doing something more harmful that is the real problem.

I have NO answers is any of this and in truth believe the planet is here for us to use. Not abuse, but use. And based on what I see (not hear) most of you believe the same thing, or you would live in cities and just look at webcam images of Winnipesaukee so as to not impact it in any way.

Well this should be more than enough to get me pulverized in responses,,,
We know the answers to all of these questions. The lake is obviously great for swimming and not advised for drinking.

You're way too cynical on the inability of government and people to help the lake. Gas guzzler taxes and MPG requirements did improve average fuel economy. Government incentives for EVs (and solar) have been essential to getting both of those industries off the ground, and we are now weaning ourselves off of them as the economics of the new technology are becoming equal to the old entrenched stuff. (plenty of documentation for all these assertions if you google) And as ishoot has pointed out--uses (abuses) of the lake by individuals were much worse decades ago. We can do this!
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 09-24-2020, 11:51 AM   #106
XCR-700
Senior Member
 
XCR-700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andover, MA
Posts: 673
Thanks: 346
Thanked 225 Times in 126 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingScot View Post
We know the answers to all of these questions. The lake is obviously great for swimming and not advised for drinking.

You're way too cynical on the inability of government and people to help the lake. Gas guzzler taxes and MPG requirements did improve average fuel economy. Government incentives for EVs (and solar) have been essential to getting both of those industries off the ground, and we are now weaning ourselves off of them as the economics of the new technology are becoming equal to the old entrenched stuff. (plenty of documentation for all these assertions if you google) And as ishoot has pointed out--uses (abuses) of the lake by individuals were much worse decades ago. We can do this!
Hummm, guess we have different glasses.

I'll totally confess to your comment "You're way too cynical on the inability of government and people to help the lake." The problem is I work for uncle Sam, and it is as corrupt and inefficient and wrong-headed as many believe. The incompetence of many of my coworkers dumbfounding and the countless wasted tax dollars I see every day is enough to make me literally sick every day. I once had this epiphany, that we should never have a military draft unless the enemy is marching onto our shores, BUT, if you want to make the United States government better, make EVERY kid serve 1 full year as a civil servant as soon as they graduate from high school and before college or any time off period. After a year if they dont want to change things in government, then there is no hope for the future and government will forever more remain dysfunctional.

Regarding "Gas guzzler taxes and MPG requirements did improve average fuel economy." Sorry, most of it is a lie, the actual EPA ratings are worthless and do not represent how people use their cars. In addition the manufacturers fudge the tests to make their numbers look good. Perfect example was the brilliant but total fraud of the diesel emission testing. My current truck averages 12MPG in real world driving, just the same as if you had a 1975 truck of the same class. And if you want a 30MPG car, you can certainly find many, but they were actually also available in 1975, just less people wanted them back then.

As for your comment "Government incentives for EVs (and solar) have been essential to getting both of those industries off the ground, and we are now weaning ourselves off of them as the economics of the new technology are becoming equal to the old entrenched stuff." AGREED! But in truth that money didnt come from no where, "I" am paying for those changes, and as I dont use any of them, arguably, "I" am not getting anything for my tax dollars. How is that fair?

I will forego any discussion about what is best from an environmental perspective for the moment, even though I believe EV cars and the whole solar industry "currently" have just as many problems as the carbon-fuel industry. They may be different environmental problems, but they unquestionably have them. But I will concede that if the "current" EV car and solar industry stay small, its a reasonable stepping stone to a better future that will come in time.

Well thats what I see through my glasses. Your vision my be different.
XCR-700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2020, 12:22 PM   #107
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 2,406
Thanks: 702
Thanked 875 Times in 545 Posts
Default Nhlakes

It's not just Winnipesaukee. Smaller lakes have bigger problemsbecause thewy can't absorb the abuse. Many thatr used to be vac ation oriented are now supporting year round living. Fortunately, this means better caretakers, and better understanding or our responsibilities.
www.NHLAKES.org publishes a booklet aimed at what we can do to make our lakes clean and healthy. Most ideas there are fairly simple, but, as with many simple things we just need to be reminded.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post:
ApS (09-24-2020)
Old 09-25-2020, 05:24 AM   #108
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,764
Thanks: 964
Thanked 1,145 Times in 697 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
Sorry, according to gillygirl I've jumped the shark on this one.

I'll have to come up with another, how about this from 1969 looking down Alton Bay. Clearly I was ready to start the day with a boat ride, usually to Downings for some pre-mix

I forgot to mention when I first saw this: "jumped the shark" is not an apt cliché here. What you meant to say is, "I was late to the party" or "I've succumb to the torture of Sisyphus" to indicate having missed something that already happened or trite repetition as opposed to "jumping the shark" indicating something no longer popular.

I'm interested in any other clichés that would apply as well!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
thinkxingu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2020, 07:27 AM   #109
XCR-700
Senior Member
 
XCR-700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andover, MA
Posts: 673
Thanks: 346
Thanked 225 Times in 126 Posts
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkxingu View Post
I forgot to mention when I first saw this: "jumped the shark" is not an apt cliché here. What you meant to say is, "I was late to the party" or "I've succumb to the torture of Sisyphus" to indicate having missed something that already happened or trite repetition as opposed to "jumping the shark" indicating something no longer popular.

I'm interested in any other clichés that would apply as well!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
No "jumped the shark" was the right term as it was referring to over use of the same baby photo I had posted several times.

If you are referring to something else, then the lesson is lost on me without additional detail.

Sorry
XCR-700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2020, 07:52 AM   #110
gillygirl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 502
Thanks: 642
Thanked 218 Times in 134 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
No "jumped the shark" was the right term as it was referring to over use of the same baby photo I had posted several times.

If you are referring to something else, then the lesson is lost on me without additional detail.

Sorry
“Jumping the shark is an idiom used to describe a moment when something that was once widely popular, but has since grown less popular, makes a misguided attempt at generating publicity that instead only serves to highlight its irrelevance. This is especially applicable to television series or other entertainment outlets.[1] The phrase derives from an episode of sitcom Happy Days (1974–1984), in which the character Fonzie jumps over a shark while on water-skis.[2][3][4] This gimmick strayed absurdly outside the original storyline of the sitcom.”

You didn’t jump the shark, you just used one pic too often. I love this pic.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
__________________
GG
gillygirl is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gillygirl For This Useful Post:
FlyingScot (09-25-2020)
Old 09-25-2020, 08:12 AM   #111
XCR-700
Senior Member
 
XCR-700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andover, MA
Posts: 673
Thanks: 346
Thanked 225 Times in 126 Posts
Talking

Ah, whatever happened to those boyish good looks and blond hair.

Gone with the beloved boat and my youth and those pajamas,,,

I suppose it would be inappropriate, in this thread, to ask for advice for a Viking funeral on Winnipesaukee,,, I figure my first pictures were here, and so should my last pictures.

I probably still have a few good years in me, so I'll hold that discussion for a later date/different thread

XCR-700 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to XCR-700 For This Useful Post:
dippasan (10-16-2020), thinkxingu (09-25-2020)
Old 09-25-2020, 08:44 PM   #112
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 1,057
Thanks: 618
Thanked 451 Times in 269 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
Hummm, guess we have different glasses.

I'll totally confess to your comment "You're way too cynical on the inability of government and people to help the lake." The problem is I work for uncle Sam, and it is as corrupt and inefficient and wrong-headed as many believe. The incompetence of many of my coworkers dumbfounding and the countless wasted tax dollars I see every day is enough to make me literally sick every day. I once had this epiphany, that we should never have a military draft unless the enemy is marching onto our shores, BUT, if you want to make the United States government better, make EVERY kid serve 1 full year as a civil servant as soon as they graduate from high school and before college or any time off period. After a year if they dont want to change things in government, then there is no hope for the future and government will forever more remain dysfunctional.

Regarding "Gas guzzler taxes and MPG requirements did improve average fuel economy." Sorry, most of it is a lie, the actual EPA ratings are worthless and do not represent how people use their cars. In addition the manufacturers fudge the tests to make their numbers look good. Perfect example was the brilliant but total fraud of the diesel emission testing. My current truck averages 12MPG in real world driving, just the same as if you had a 1975 truck of the same class. And if you want a 30MPG car, you can certainly find many, but they were actually also available in 1975, just less people wanted them back then.

As for your comment "Government incentives for EVs (and solar) have been essential to getting both of those industries off the ground, and we are now weaning ourselves off of them as the economics of the new technology are becoming equal to the old entrenched stuff." AGREED! But in truth that money didnt come from no where, "I" am paying for those changes, and as I dont use any of them, arguably, "I" am not getting anything for my tax dollars. How is that fair?

I will forego any discussion about what is best from an environmental perspective for the moment, even though I believe EV cars and the whole solar industry "currently" have just as many problems as the carbon-fuel industry. They may be different environmental problems, but they unquestionably have them. But I will concede that if the "current" EV car and solar industry stay small, its a reasonable stepping stone to a better future that will come in time.

Well thats what I see through my glasses. Your vision my be different.
Our disagreement on EVs and gas guzzler taxes is irrelevant to my original point. My original point was that government taxes, incentives, and rules can change people's behavior (and thus can help the lake). You might not like EVs, just for example, but I'm pretty sure you'd agree that without the $7500 rebate (that is now being phased out), the EV industry would be much smaller.
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2020, 10:29 AM   #113
XCR-700
Senior Member
 
XCR-700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andover, MA
Posts: 673
Thanks: 346
Thanked 225 Times in 126 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingScot View Post
Our disagreement on EVs and gas guzzler taxes is irrelevant to my original point. My original point was that government taxes, incentives, and rules can change people's behavior (and thus can help the lake). You might not like EVs, just for example, but I'm pretty sure you'd agree that without the $7500 rebate (that is now being phased out), the EV industry would be much smaller.
I completely agree as a positive incentive the gift of money (especially substantial amounts of money) will change peoples behavior.

But I also completely disagree that so long as the penalties are in the realm of affordable, that they will have ANY impact.

A $1200 gas guzzler tax is not going to cause a potential buyer of a $70,000 Corvette from buying their dream car and spending that money AND get the incentive to buy a Tesla 4 door EV. Its just not happening.

Nor would a $50 fertilizer use fine stop a home owner from getting the lawn they desire.

And again, for the record, I fully support EV's as a very modest gateway technology, but they have a long way to go to be clean.

And to bring this back to your point, there is very significant difference between a reasonable use fine and incentive reward program and the bazaar and inappropriate government intervention in the automotive sales/use taxation and incentive programs: Why should the government significantly tax me for something like this and egregiously reward you. Thats NOT the job of government. Its WRONG to tax me on this and gift you with my money, especially when your EV has a laundry list of cradle to grave environmental and other problems.

I guess that this is an example of a more classic view of the role of Government, as opposed to the dysfunctional government we have currently devolved into.

So in the end, dont be surprised that someone who is not personally shopping for an EV is further alienated about EV's to know that the EV buyers who brag about the incentives were gifted that money from those who were not dissuaded from buying what they wanted and suffered the gas guzzler tax. Well thats one cur buyers perspective.

And sorry the EV/gas guzzler subject keeps popping up in this thread about Winnipesaukee water quality,but it does have some bearing, if only in the larger whole world perspective.

XCR-700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2020, 01:10 PM   #114
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 1,057
Thanks: 618
Thanked 451 Times in 269 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
I completely agree as a positive incentive the gift of money (especially substantial amounts of money) will change peoples behavior.

But I also completely disagree that so long as the penalties are in the realm of affordable, that they will have ANY impact.

A $1200 gas guzzler tax is not going to cause a potential buyer of a $70,000 Corvette from buying their dream car and spending that money AND get the incentive to buy a Tesla 4 door EV. Its just not happening.

Nor would a $50 fertilizer use fine stop a home owner from getting the lawn they desire.

And again, for the record, I fully support EV's as a very modest gateway technology, but they have a long way to go to be clean.

And to bring this back to your point, there is very significant difference between a reasonable use fine and incentive reward program and the bazaar and inappropriate government intervention in the automotive sales/use taxation and incentive programs: Why should the government significantly tax me for something like this and egregiously reward you. Thats NOT the job of government. Its WRONG to tax me on this and gift you with my money, especially when your EV has a laundry list of cradle to grave environmental and other problems.

I guess that this is an example of a more classic view of the role of Government, as opposed to the dysfunctional government we have currently devolved into.

So in the end, dont be surprised that someone who is not personally shopping for an EV is further alienated about EV's to know that the EV buyers who brag about the incentives were gifted that money from those who were not dissuaded from buying what they wanted and suffered the gas guzzler tax. Well thats one cur buyers perspective.

And sorry the EV/gas guzzler subject keeps popping up in this thread about Winnipesaukee water quality,but it does have some bearing, if only in the larger whole world perspective.

I agree that small penalties/rewards are silly.

On fertilizer, just for example, I think people directly on the lake should not be allowed to use fertilizer that contains phosphorous. It's basically pouring a known pollutant directly into the water.

On EVs, I think the USA made a smart investment in a critical technology for the future, and now an American company is kicking the butts of our frenemies overseas. It's done this many times in the past. Some of the bets don't pay off (I'm sure we could find hundreds that fail), but some of them turn out to be the internet, GPS, cancer cures, etc.
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.35018 seconds