Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues > Speed Limits
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 03-18-2011, 10:25 AM   #1
bilproject
Senior Member
 
bilproject's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bear Island/Fort Myers, Fla
Posts: 192
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 1
Thanked 37 Times in 24 Posts
Default SB27 Coming to Vote Expected to Pass

SB27 an ammendment to the speed limit law is coming up for a vote and expected to pass. The amendment is an increase of the speed limit on the Broads from 45 to 55mph during the day time. Surprised it has not come up here yet.
bilproject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2011, 10:42 AM   #2
Slickcraft
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Welch Island and West Alton
Posts: 2,550
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,400 Times in 644 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bilproject View Post
SB27 an ammendment to the speed limit law is coming up for a vote and expected to pass. The amendment is an increase of the speed limit on the Broads from 45 to 55mph during the day time. Surprised it has not come up here yet.
While I don't read the speed limit forum, it probably has come up there. Some time ago Don created a separate forum area for controversial issues.
Slickcraft is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2011, 10:42 AM   #3
AllAbourdon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 61
Thanks: 22
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...802#post152802
AllAbourdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2011, 03:20 PM   #4
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,543
Thanks: 105
Thanked 377 Times in 243 Posts
Default

I am surprised not to see the senate results posted yet. It was passed today, 13-11.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new...t_speed_limit/
codeman671 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2011, 04:09 PM   #5
Seaplane Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 881
Thanks: 313
Thanked 493 Times in 188 Posts
Thumbs up Thank you

Thank you to those level-headed Senators who voted in favor of this bill. Thank you for not being brainwashed by WINNFABS, especially by their President who claims that hundreds of island resident must cross the Broads in order to get to their island homes (Letter to the editor, March 22 issue of Laconia Daily Sun). That one really took the cake. She also stated that "Any boater-motorized or not-has to pass through the Broads on their way from one part of the lake to another or to enjoy the Broads waters." Hmmmmm.... If I go from Paugus Bay to Meredith, do I have to go through the Broads? If I go from Alton Bay to Wolfeboro, do I have to go through the Broads? In fact, I can go from Center Harbor to Alton Bay without going through the Broads. Her arguments just "don't hold water".
Seaplane Pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-23-2011, 09:15 PM   #6
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,763
Thanks: 225
Thanked 627 Times in 367 Posts
Default

I just love this: "Supporters of the current law said the "broads" is used as an intersection and should be treated no differently than the rest of the lake."

That "intersection" is more than FIFTEEN square miles. That's bigger than a lot of NH towns.
Dave R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2011, 09:50 PM   #7
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,147
Thanks: 191
Thanked 1,374 Times in 554 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave R View Post
I just love this: "Supporters of the current law said the "broads" is used as an intersection and should be treated no differently than the rest of the lake."

That "intersection" is more than FIFTEEN square miles. That's bigger than a lot of NH towns.
For some drivers it appears FIFTEEN square miles is a little tight. Considering the source of the comment, that tells us a lot

Maybe the supporters of this need to re-do boater education!
MAXUM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 03:56 PM   #8
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,434
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 196
Thanked 501 Times in 374 Posts
Default

You understand that 16 senate votes would be needed to over-ride a governor's veto if it even get's passed by the 400 seat House and goes to the governor's desk, and only 13 out of 24 senators voted yes. Considering that two of the state senators from the three senate districts with Winnipesaukee towns voted no, Governor Lynch just may decide to get out his veto stamp which says "Don't even THINK about raising the Winnipesaukee speed limit....just FORGETABOUTIT....and be a SAFE BOATER!"

Three cheers for the eleven state senators who voted NO.....hut - hut - hut!

On June 28, 2010, Gov Lynch signed the law that made the 45-30mph speed limit a permanent law as opposed to a temporary two year trial law so what do you think the chances are that now, about one year later, he may think it best to veto an increase to 55mph?

If the 400 seat House of Reps catches any scuttlebutt that the Gov is thinking about a veto, would that be likely to influence their upcoming vote? Only time will tell how the bill fares in the House of Representatives. I have no clue!
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!

Last edited by fatlazyless; 03-25-2011 at 02:28 PM.
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 06:22 AM   #9
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

This article is in today's LDS

Lawmakers defer to Lakes Region sentiment as 55 on The Broads bill fails
committee test



By Michael Kitch
May 04, 2011 12:00 am
CONCORD ó Defenders of speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee scored a victory yesterday when the House Transportation Committee, in a show of bipartisanship, voted 11 to 6 to not recommend a bill that would raise the limit on The Broads to 55 miles per hour.

The bill will go before the full House next week.

"It isn't over," said Sandy Helve of the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs), "but, this was a very good result." She said that the discussion in committee indicated that members were impressed by the strong and widespread support for speed limits among individuals and businesses in the Lakes Region.

Scott Verdonck, president of Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), said that "we knew it was coming." In a prepared statement he said his group was "outraged" by the vote, charging that the committee "fell victim to fabricated stories . . . that the additional 10 miles an hour (from 45 MPH) would result in accidents and mayhem" despite statements by the New Hampshire Marine Patrol to the contrary.

Senate Bill 27, which carried the Senate by the narrowest of margins, appeared to have strong support in the Transportation Committee. The Lakes Region is not represented on the committee, whose chairman, Representative Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry), has always voted against speed limits, and vice-chairman, Representative John Hikel (R-Goffstown) sponsored the bill.

But, Hikel alone spoke in support of the bill. The dozen Republicans on the committee split evenly while all five Democrats voted against the bill.

The split among Republicans on the committee mirrored a rift in the GOP leadership in the House between Speaker Bill O'Brien and Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt. After twice voting against speed limits and assuring Verdonck he would do so again, Bettencourt told members that he considered speed limits a local issue and would join representatives from the Lakes Region in upholding them.

"He took everyone by surprise," said Verdonck, who said his group will do all it can to ensure that Bettencourt's first term as majority leader is his last.

Meanwhile, as the committee convened, O'Brien swept into the room with five Republican representatives in tow intending to replace any absent committee members by his appointment. Three were missing; two on opposite sides of the issue and one whose position was in doubt. All three replacements voted with the minority in favor of the bill.

Hikel began by claiming that there is no evidence that speed poses problems on the lake and reminding the committee that the bill would permit "55 mph. not 85 mph.on the open water of The Broads.

No one else, either Republican or Democrat, spoke for the bill. Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy.

Representative Lisa Scontsas (R-Nashua) added that not one business owner supported the bill at the hearing. Several committee members stressed the overwhelming opposition to the bill expressed by the those who live and work in the Lakes Region.

When Hikel's motion of "ought to pass" failed 11 to 6, he offered an amendment to form a study committee to consider the issue, which was rejected by the same margin. With that the committee voted to report the bill to the House "inexpedient to legislate."

In New Hampshire, all bills are reported to the floor of the House or Senate for action, even if the committee that studied the matter voted not to recommend the legislation.

Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts. The committee vote suggests that even lawmakers with a libertarian bent, disinclined to extend regulation, sense that the greater reward may lie with numbers rather than principle.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rusty For This Useful Post:
Skip (05-04-2011)
Old 05-04-2011, 07:37 AM   #10
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Sandy Helve is very astute, "this isn't over"

When a law is passed and does nothing it was intended to do the opposition will remain. When you change a law on lake that turns an everyday activity into technical lawbreakers, that's a problem. If anyone thinks a boat doing 55 MPH on Lake Winni is an issue, then look at the safety record over the last several decades. Emperical data will always trump F.E.A.R. (False Evidence Appearing Real)

There is a small faction around the lake (Hutchins, Helve, BI, APS, Rusty, Skip, and others) who must be very miserable if they have to spend this amount of time trying to restrict more and more activities on the lake. From reading their descriptions of the lake, it sounds like it's a miserable place to be with or without a SL.......

This is not a "victory" for anyone. I hope this fact is not lost in the discussion.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 07:58 AM   #11
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Representative Brian Phodes was so right when he said this:

"Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy."
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 08:03 AM   #12
chipj29
Senior Member
 
chipj29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,859
Thanks: 496
Thanked 290 Times in 154 Posts
Default

What seems to be lost by many speed limit opponents (including SBONH I think) is that winnflabs has one goal: to rid the lake of the evil GFBLs. They donít care about safety, they donít care about the actual speed limit. They just want to do whatever it takes to make those dam GFBLs to go away.
Any bill that adjusts or eliminates the speed limits as they are now are viewed as a threat. They think that if you allow even a 10MPH limit adjustment that there is a chance the big bad GFBLs will come back to the lake. They are not happy if there is even a single GFBL on the lake.

There is no doubt in my mind that any future legislation pertaining to speed limits will be a very difficult fight for the speed limit opponents.

Face it gang, stats donít matter. There are more supporters than there are opponents, and as long as they continue to tell their stories of feeling safer, then the opponents donít have a chance.

Like Rusty pointed out, supporters outnumbered opponents 7 to 1. Now change the word "supporters" to "voters" and do the math.
__________________
Getting ready for winter!
chipj29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 08:18 AM   #13
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
Representative Brian Phodes was so right when he said this:

"Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy."
Rusty, please provide factual data that supports that claim I bolded. We know there is no data that exists and we've discussed it ad nausem.

The 7:1 is based on who signed into a log at the meeting. Sorry but that's a terrible way to base voting.

Example: How many gay marriage proponents do you think showed up at the state house? WAAAY more than opposed it is. And how is that vote working out in states across the country? (Note: this is just an example and don't use this to attempt any extrapolation of my viewpoint on the aforementioned).

I woul PAY to debate this issue on the technical merits with WinnFabs.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 08:29 AM   #14
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chipj29 View Post
...There is no doubt in my mind that any future legislation pertaining to speed limits will be a very difficult fight for the speed limit opponents.

Face it gang, stats donít matter. There are more supporters than there are opponents, and as long as they continue to tell their stories of feeling safer, then the opponents donít have a chance....
I think its going to always be a battle because WinnFlabs gets free benefit of the doubt. To those who don't own boats the idea of speed on a lake is not something they understand. My S-I-L was a classic example when the SL discussion came up. After a ride on the boat her comment was how in the world did they justify 45 MPH and "that's not that fast at all".

I suspect a SL will likely always remain but not 45 MPH. It's just too slow for a lake this size.

Alas, this is politics so perception trumps reality. I personally don't see this as a dead issue, not even close.

As I said before, I think WinnFlabs made a huge tactical error in not supporting SB-27 as that would have been very hard to get people to change the limits afterwards. Now everything is fair game
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 09:38 AM   #15
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

The author of the LDS article summed it up pretty much by the below statement:

Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 09:48 AM   #16
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
The author of the LDS article summed it up pretty much by the below statement:

Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts.
Rusty, you missed the word "relatively". Anyday WinnFabs wants to debate facts please contact me and we'll arrange it. My only request is it be recorded on video. I've yet to have anyone willing to take me up on the offer I'll even agree to allow them to have note cards and I'll be allowed no prompts. I'll warn you that I'm no rookie and have no shortage of data to back me up.....

I did not spend my last political points on the SL as rafting is what I'm after. My BIL who is a litigating attorney (and lives in NH) also sees many faults in the rafting restrictions on the lake
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 10:03 AM   #17
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
Rusty, you missed the word "relatively". Anyday WinnFabs wants to debate facts please contact me and we'll arrange it. My only request is it be recorded on video. I've yet to have anyone willing to take me up on the offer I'll even agree to allow them to have note cards and I'll be allowed no prompts. I'll warn you that I'm no rookie and have no shortage of data to back me up.....

I did not spend my last political points on the SL as rafting is what I'm after. My BIL who is a litigating attorney (and lives in NH) also sees many faults in the rafting restrictions on the lake
I'm sure you are the best of the best when it comes to debating.

As you said in another post about us forum members: "I have more years of education than many people on this board combined. Not arrogance, fact."

If we ever meet I will be sure to Genuflect.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 10:16 AM   #18
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
I'm sure you are the best of the best when it comes to debating.

As you said in another post about us forum members: "I have more years of education than many people on this board combined. Not arrogance, fact."

If we ever meet I will be sure to Genuflect.
I'm just waiting for the invitation.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 10:38 AM   #19
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Why on earth would WinnFABS want to debate this issue with LS when...

1. This issue is dead! The current speed limit is as good as chiseled in stone.

2. He has not shown WinnFABS even the common courtesy of using their right name.

3. His posts demonstrate he doesn't understand why about 90% of citizens support speed limits.

4. His last name is Phycho.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
Rusty (05-04-2011), Skip (05-04-2011)
Old 05-04-2011, 11:22 AM   #20
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

BI, SB-27 is dead. The SL issue remains.

I'll tell you why WinnFlabs won't debate:
1. Lack of any meaningful data
2. Deceit can not be translated during a debate
3. I do understand why many people support a SL. I also understand 90% of the state doesn't even own boats.
4. I find psycho to be an endearing term in respect to my lawn. I can hear my little green friends talking to me right now and they are telling me that it's true, a BEAR does sheot in the woods

Last edited by lawn psycho; 05-05-2011 at 06:08 AM. Reason: spelin erah I cud knot staynd
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
RTTOOL (05-04-2011)
Old 05-04-2011, 11:40 AM   #21
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

The citizens of New Hampshire do not all own boats. However they DO own Lake Winnipesaukee.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
Skip (05-04-2011)
Old 05-04-2011, 11:43 AM   #22
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
However they DO own Lake Winnipesaukee.
You said it, not me

Edit: How are people able to travel to the Broads on Lake Winni without the use of a boat?

Last edited by lawn psycho; 05-04-2011 at 12:26 PM. Reason: Thought popped into my head...
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 02:43 PM   #23
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,434
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 196
Thanked 501 Times in 374 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
You said it, not me

Edit: How are people able to travel to the Broads on Lake Winni without the use of a boat?
The most affordable boat for getting onto the Big Lake is most definately a second hand or used kayak. By searching through the New Hampshire classified ads, it is possible to find a nice, usable 14 to 16' long distance kayak for about $250 to 500. Beginner kayaks, which run about nine feet long can be found for as low as 100-dollars. By virtue of not needing a trailer, engine, gasoline or boater's insurance, it makes a kayak the least expensive way to get out onto the water.

Another major plus for kayaks is they are FUN to paddle and paddling a kayak provides a lot of exercise. Kayaks give you a feeling of being close to the water which is something you do not get in big, fast boats.

So, here's a question for Lawn Psycho. How does kayaking safety relate to the current battle between the SBoNH and WinnFabs with regard to increasing the speed limit from 45-mph up to 55-mph?
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 02:52 PM   #24
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
The most affordable boat for getting onto the Big Lake is most definately a kayak. By searching through the New Hampshire classified ads, it is possible to find a nice, usable 14 to 16' long distance kayak for about $250 to 500. By virtue of not needing a trailer, engine, gasoline or boater's insurance, it makes a kayak the least expensive way to get out onto the water.

Another major feature is that paddling a kayak provides a lot of exercise.

So, here's a question for Lawn Pscho. How does kayaking safety relate to the current battle between the SBoNH and WinnFabs with regard to increasing the speed limit from 45-mph up to 55-mph?
I have a kayak. I also know that many days having a kayak on the broads is a dumb idea when the wind wips up. For that same reason there's days I keep my 22 ft long, 8.5 ft wide bowrider off the water as well.

Kayaks and the SL are not related.

Having any craft out on the lake absent of some form of insurance is risky my opinion. If you have any assets of value then I recommend you talk to your insurance guy about an umbrella policy. I'm not one to throw money away for insurance but when you are on the water with some craft costing $100s of thousands of dollars if you cause an issue you could be up the river without a paddle (sorry, I couldn't resist)
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 03:19 PM   #25
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,434
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 196
Thanked 501 Times in 374 Posts
Default

Yes, that's for sure, and it's always good to have a friendly insurance company on your side.

Attention KAYAK INSURANCE. Is there such a policy as kayak, canoe or small non-motorized sailboat insurance. Supposedly, one's homeowner's insurance provides coverage for these small, non-motorized boats but there's always some other and better way in the insurance coverage biz?

As far as kayaks and speed limits not being related, that doesn't seem too safety oriented considering that they both share the same waters and are as about as opposite as can be. One is small, slow, human powered, close to the water, and can be difficult to see, while the other is much bigger, higher and goes much faster, yet they both share the same waters. Sort of like bicycles and cars that share the same road.
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 04:12 PM   #26
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
As far as kayaks and speed limits not being related, that doesn't seem too safety oriented considering that they both share the same waters and are as about as opposite as can be. One is small, slow, human powered, close to the water, and can be difficult to see, while the other is much bigger, higher and goes much faster, yet they both share the same waters. Sort of like bicycles and cars that share the same road.
FLL, they don't allow bicycles on highways. Maybe you're on to something

Tell me when was the last time a kayak was run over by a boat on Winni? I'm forgetful.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 04:49 PM   #27
chase1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 53
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Yes, that's for sure, and it's always good to have a friendly insurance company on your side.

Attention KAYAK INSURANCE. Is there such a policy as kayak, canoe or small non-motorized sailboat insurance. Supposedly, one's homeowner's insurance provides coverage for these small, non-motorized boats but there's always some other and better way in the insurance coverage biz?

.
We have a policy on our Trac 14 sailboat.

Chase1
chase1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 05:24 PM   #28
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Itís funny how not even one business owner supported the bill at the hearing. Itís also funny how several committee members stressed the overwhelming opposition to the bill expressed by the those who live and work in the Lakes Region...I wonder why.

Where is all the support for this Bill. No wonder itís going down in defeat. Just plan lack of support.

Why didnít the SBONH and the GFBL boaters have more supporters there. Evidently they have given up.

How about the big debater, why wasn't he there? Never mind he's too busy keeping all of us here in the forum in line.

Last edited by Rusty; 05-04-2011 at 06:03 PM.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rusty For This Useful Post:
Skip (05-04-2011)
Old 05-04-2011, 10:14 PM   #29
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post

Tell me when was the last time a kayak was run over by a boat on Winni? I'm forgetful.
The last time I can remember was July 2007 when a power boat cut a kayak in half near Stonedam Island. The kayaker jumped out before the accident and was not injured. However as I remember it, he had considerable cause for embarrassment!
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 11:05 PM   #30
Dhuberty24
Senior Member
 
Dhuberty24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hooksett,NH
Posts: 82
Thanks: 11
Thanked 32 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
Itís funny how not even one business owner supported the bill at the hearing. Itís also funny how several committee members stressed the overwhelming opposition to the bill expressed by the those who live and work in the Lakes Region...I wonder why.

Where is all the support for this Bill. No wonder itís going down in defeat. Just plan lack of support.

Why didnít the SBONH and the GFBL boaters have more supporters there. Evidently they have given up.

How about the big debater, why wasn't he there? Never mind he's too busy keeping all of us here in the forum in line.
Because we all work. We are not all retired citizens with to much money and free time.
Dhuberty24 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dhuberty24 For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-05-2011), nhbasser (05-06-2011), RTTOOL (05-04-2011), Ryan (05-05-2011), Wolfeboro_Baja (05-05-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 05:22 AM   #31
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,122
Thanks: 1,250
Thanked 1,375 Times in 688 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
The last time I can remember was July 2007 when a power boat cut a kayak in half near Stonedam Island. The kayaker jumped out before the accident and was not injured. However as I remember it, he had considerable cause for embarrassment!
Wasn't that an unlit kayak at night... with a paddler who forgot his shorts?
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
Wolfeboro_Baja (05-05-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 06:05 AM   #32
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
Wasn't that an unlit kayak at night... with a paddler who forgot his shorts?
This is what I am referrring too about liability. People assume a kayak would always have the right of way being human powered. Not having lights and having a vessel strike you opens you up for liability for any damage to the boat.

No lights on a vessel at night on the lake is game over IMO.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 06:50 AM   #33
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Mary Hutchins has worked real hard to make our beautiful Lake a safe place for everyone.

This well written article is in today's LDS

Reps who voted against SB-27 talked to Lakes Region people

To the editor,

Tuesday the N.H. House Transportation Committee went into executive session to vote on SB-27, which was to increase the speed limits in the" Broads" on Lake Winnipesaukee to 55 mph. Out of 14 actual members voting; 11 opposed SB-27 and three supported it. The total was actually 11 to 6 when 3 "ringers", not hearing any testimony, were added to vote in the vacant seats. Only Rep. Hikel testified to support SB-27 and all 11 who opposed it testified with their reasons.

All 11 opposed to SB-27 felt it was an overwhelming number that testified ó opposed SB-27 (7 to 1), as those that came to sign in opposed the bill (11 to 1) . They all reiterated that the overwhelming number opposing SB-27 sent e-mails and phone calls giving their personnel reasons to oppose SB-27, but the supporters had mostly form letters. Two representatives stated that even though they loved speed, Winnipesaukee was not the place to speed. The increase to 55 mph was a 20-percent increase in the speed limit and using the Coast Guard studies, that would increase the danger by 33-percent from the current 45 mph on the entire lake.

It would actually be greater because of human tendencies of feeling it is okay to go 5 to 10 mph above the speed limit. One further stated that the best conditions for speed was exactly the same conditions that swimmers, water skiers, small boats, canoes, kayaks etcÖ come out very calm days, increasing the danger by pure numbers trying to use the same water.

Reps opposing SB-27 mentioned that they have talked with many of the representatives who surround Lake Winnipesaukee and businesses, with the overwhelming majority opposing SB-27, and support the current law of 45/30 mph on the entire lake. Residents surrounding Lake Winnipesaukee overwhelmingly opposed SB-27, as indicated in a professional poll recently. Some of the veteran representatives reiterated that just last year there was a compromise to increase the speed at night and it was unanimously supported by the bi-partisan committee Ö all feeling that that was absolutely the final vote for permanent speed limits, 45 mph daytime 30 mph at night on all of Lake Winnipesaukee ó no more compromises. Another member stated that with the current financial state of N.H., who was going to pay for the new markers outlining the speed zone and who would pay for the installation and maintenance of them plus the increase in Marine Patrol to patrol that strip of speed. I thought of how many lakes that already have 45/25 speed limits stated that at least 95-percent self patrol themselves with no need to increase patrols on the lake and all tickets that were issued were supported in the courts.

Representative Hikel tried a very last minute amendment to further study the current 45/30 speed limits. It was voted down. He had only received the amendment one hour before the committee meeting and Chair Packard said he had only seen it one-half hour ago, leading many to ask who actually wrote it. After six years, I believe it has been thoroughly studied and discussed in four House committee hearings and votes. The initial RR&D House Committee's supported the 45/25 after three hearings around Lake Winnipesaukee, then a hearing that was so large it was held in the House Chambers. In the past The Transportation Committee has voted to support the 45/25 in 2009 and then the 45/30 just last year . Today's vote made it the fourth time it has passed the committee hearing. The entire House has voted three times to support 45/25 then 45/30 speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee. It really has been thoroughly vetted through the N.H. legislative process.

Rep Hikel is attempting to represent a small group of go-fast boaters who want to eliminate the speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee for their personnel indulgence, some having bought their off-shore performance boat after the speed limits had actually passed.

Next week the House will vote on this bill again and hopefully it will support those that listened to over four hours of testimony with no lunch at the hearing that opposed SB-27. Hopefully last year's bi-partisan unanimous vote to compromise the speed limits to 45/30 were permanent and permanent meaning at least more permanent than one year!

Mary Hutchins

Laconia
.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 07:28 AM   #34
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhuberty24 View Post
Because we all work. We are not all retired citizens with to much money and free time.
The reason you did not see more businesses getting involved as some were neutral and some knew it was better to not alienate customers on either side of the issue. I talked to a couple marina owners directly last year who did not open their mouths for just the reasons I mentioned.

I know very well the businesses that supported the SL and they will never see one penny of my money as they have in the past.

Looking at my Four Winns technical manual there is a whole section that lists the fuel usage and top speeds based on prop blade & pitch. There's a reason why Four Winns put that in there as people want boats that have some level performance. This is what sells boats.

To be honest I am suprised the boating industry did not step up and support SB-27 and that kinda of support needs to be looked at in the future. Getting more public awareness in magazines, etc is also paramount. Winni is a fringe market compared to places like Florida, Texas, and California and their lakes.

Having a 45 MPH limi on Winni is like having a 40MPH limit on I-93 IMO. Lower the SL on that stretch that low and the same people who would support a boat SL would be up in arms about the slow highway limit.
Get those same people educated about what it's like on the water as to what is considered fast and the 45 MPH limit would not last one day. WinnFlabs is not successful because they are smarter or more organized than anyone else. They have public perception on their side.

There were people who have not ever owned a boat or even been on the water who thought the SL was a "good idea". In some people's minds they think that's great until that same logic results in legislation that affects them.

What would really help is the "right" person get a ticket for speeding on the lake. I suspect there will never be many tickets written as you can spot MP from a great distance, the sight lines are huge, and there's really no place for them to hide like they do on the highway.

I will have one of my radar detectors onboard this year to get an idea of how often they are clocking people. I suspect it would be a lot of wasted time for MP with minimal results when most boats aren't even going 45 MPH to begin with.

Last year I had a phone conversation with a very well know person from this site with a discussion about rafting and the SL. I told him my real name but did not ID myself as a forum member. He owns waterfront and was under the impression that I was a SL supporter (his assumption, not by me duping him). I have long agonized over revealing what was said but it is very clear that he assumes anyone who is not a waterfront owner is scum of the earth. Given what he sells I am still shocked after what I heard come out of his mouth. I am REALLY close to spilling the beans and probably should have done it long ago. There is a "Z" in his user name.

What I have come to conclude is that the SL is about those who own on the lake and goes beyond safety or public interest.

After having been involved with this forum (since near the very beginning but under my old name) and knowing people's true colors I've lost a lot of respect for people on the water. It's not the opinions that bother me. It's the attitudes that some people have about people's use of the water. I just can not understand why people buy on the water and get upset by people using the lake. If people want to lie and say it's because of wild parties, etc please go tell that story to someone else. I know better.

Maybe some mandatory education attached to deeds for shorefront owners to inform them that boats use the water during the summer is needed before getting the keys would do some good. And the class would be in Berlin, NH and only held on Memorial Day, July 4th, and Labor Day weekends
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
Seaplane Pilot (05-05-2011), Wolfeboro_Baja (05-05-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 08:14 AM   #35
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

At the hearing "Two representatives stated that even though they loved speed, Winnipesaukee was not the place to speed. The increase to 55 mph was a 20-percent increase in the speed limit and using the Coast Guard studies, that would increase the danger by 33-percent from the current 45 mph on the entire lake."
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 08:30 AM   #36
Dhuberty24
Senior Member
 
Dhuberty24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hooksett,NH
Posts: 82
Thanks: 11
Thanked 32 Times in 19 Posts
Default

I know this has already been said but, show me stats. In my opinion the lake has always been safe. The only danger I have seen is rental boats and the occasional bone head towing a tuber.
Dhuberty24 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dhuberty24 For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-05-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 08:35 AM   #37
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhuberty24 View Post
Because we all work. We are not all retired citizens with to much money and free time.
Then maybe when someone takes on a project, i.e. Speed Limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, they should realize that it takes time, energy, sincere support, and money.
Thatís how I have done things during my life on this earth.

Just a thought.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:04 AM   #38
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,434
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 196
Thanked 501 Times in 374 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post

.... to represent a small group of go-fast boaters who want to eliminate the speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee for their personnel indulgence, some having bought their off-shore performance boat after the speed limits had actually passed.
Buying a go-fast after the speed limits got passed......how's about that? I smell a bargain GO-FAST boat, super-duper second hand, low price deal at work here......big-time! Never underestimate the selling power of a low priced bargain boat, even when making the purchase is totally not practical. Could be that someone fell in love with a boat and could not resist the low price on a second hand cream puff, or something. TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE! ....and is there any chance of posting a photo of the bargain boat?

And along the same line of thought, right now what with gasoline close to four dollars/gallon is probably a good time to buy a large, giant super-duper used pickup truck as a tow vehicle to be towing the go-fast down to the freebie public boat launch in Portsmouth on the Piscataqua River to access the atlantic.
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to fatlazyless For This Useful Post:
Rusty (05-05-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 09:10 AM   #39
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Buying a go-fast after the speed limits got passed......how's about that? I smell a bargain boat, super-duper second hand, low price deal at work here. Never underestimate the power of a low price boat, whether making the purchase is totally not practical. Could be that someone fell in love with a boat and could not resist the low price on a second hand cream puff, or something. TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE! ....and is there any chance of posting a photo of the bargain boat?

And along the same line of thought, right now what with gasoline close to four dollars/gallon is probably a good time to buy a large used pickup truck as a tow vehicle to be towing the go-fast down to the freebie public boat launch in Portsmouth on the Piscatua River to access the atlantic.
Thank you FLL, that is sooooooooooooooooo funny!!

You made my day!
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:20 AM   #40
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Buying a go-fast after the speed limits got passed......how's about that? I smell a bargain boat, super-duper second hand, low price deal at work here. Never underestimate the power of a low price boat, whether making the purchase is totally not practical. Could be that someone fell in love with a boat and could not resist the low price on a second hand cream puff, or something. TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE! ....and is there any chance of posting a photo of the bargain boat?

And along the same line of thought, right now what with gasoline close to four dollars/gallon is probably a good time to buy a large used pickup truck as a tow vehicle to be towing the go-fast down to the freebie public boat launch in Portsmouth on the Piscatua River to access the atlantic.
FLL, why are you jumping on "go fast boats"? My Four Winns Bowrider can exceed 45 MPH. Is it a go-fast?

Since you bring up towing, there's more risk of injury and death by driving to and from the lake than being on the water. Fact.

Lastly, many people are towing their boats illegally with overloaded axles. The listed dry weight of my boat and trailer is under 5000 lbs. I've had it on a scale and with fuel, toys, etc it's well over that. I've seen people towing the equivalent of my boat with midsize trucks that clearly have no business pulling it down the road. If they were stopped by the police and had the axles measured they would be written a fine but the police tend to leave most people alone on this one. If that truck/boat were involved in an accident is also increases potential liability. It's not just "go-fasts" who need to look at bigger tow vehicles. Food for thought.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 11:43 AM   #41
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Some comments from some Pro-SL folks who want people to believe they are civil and would never call people names or give veiled threats

*COUGH* Hello Phantom

Quote
hey wolfie.

it says it was sent by the webmaster of sbonh. it was forwarded to me by a recipient of somebody who belongs to sbonh so she can keep an eye on what those clowns, err cowboys are up to!

lots of turncoats on that mailing list, if they only knew. haha those schmucks!"
ENDQUOTE

Maybe some revealing of the truth?
QUOTE
isn't it amazing how quiet the cowboys have gotten now that we know that speed limits are here to stay????? ah.....the sweet smell of success! sure beats the noxious smell of fumes from the now severely throttled down GFBL boats! looks like its time for the ocean racer wannabees to head to the nearest BOATUS store and stock up on dramamine & off shore charts....hahahahaha!

EndQuote

Wow, here's a beauty from our friend 'The Phantom'. This person needs a mental evaluation if this is what they think of people...
Quote:
simple. because it will be abused. the same GFBLers that abust the speed limit, abuse alcohol and drugs, abuse lakefront property owners, abuse kayakers and canoeiests and wildlife, and quite simply abuse common sense will also use switchable mufflers in juvenile and harrasing ways. waiting for that fool lawn psycho and baghdad bob and others of there ilks to now threaten to surrround Bear island with there mufflers switched off to harass th fine peeps there that have tried to defend the sanctity of the lake!
Endquote

Ah, the pro-SL never calls or edits people's name...
Quote:
actually I dont consider the article "uncomplimentary" at all. methinks that it actually sums up mr. Verpunk very well giving a true picture of this so-called "safe" boater of NH!

in my humble opinion the only way you and your family can actualy be safe sharing the lake with this speed freak is if you are in a subbmarine!

hey skip you out there in this site to? where can we buy a cheep subbmarine????

dive, dive, dive. grab the woman an children here comes the Verdunks!

Endquote

A little bit of hatred in you Phantom?

Quote
I also note that big mouth political director bagdad bob still has his muzzle firmly in place. i was laffin out loud readin about him & verpunk on the mount washngton shakedown cruise the other day. does anyone think they ever got above deck or did they spend the whole time below waiting for the bar to open. cause we all know what there favorite pastime is when they are on the water!
Endquote

I'll keep throwing these out there, let me know when you want me to stop....

If anyone wants the link to the site to show just how "civil" the pro-SL crowd is, just PM me.

For the record, a very prominent user from this site last year during a phone conversation told me the several ways he disturbs anyone who dares anchor near his property or dock. This was not bantering on his part. I feel very sorry for him actually to be that miserable of a person.

Last edited by lawn psycho; 05-05-2011 at 12:14 PM.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-05-2011), Little Bear (05-05-2011), Wolfeboro_Baja (05-05-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 04:38 PM   #42
chipj29
Senior Member
 
chipj29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,859
Thanks: 496
Thanked 290 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
Mary Hutchins has worked real hard to make our beautiful Lake a safe place for everyone.

This well written article is in today's LDS

Reps who voted against SB-27 talked to Lakes Region people

To the editor,



It would actually be greater because of human tendencies of feeling it is okay to go 5 to 10 mph above the speed limit. One further stated that the best conditions for speed was exactly the same conditions that swimmers, water skiers, small boats, canoes, kayaks etcÖ come out very calm days, increasing the danger by pure numbers trying to use the same water.
What is the danger exactly?
__________________
Getting ready for winter!
chipj29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 10:04 PM   #43
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,809
Thanks: 2,326
Thanked 848 Times in 590 Posts
Thumbs down Mary Hutchins

So who the h3ll is Mary Hutchins? What makes everyone decides she speaks for everyone on the lake. She sure didn't speak to the real natives of the Lakes Region like me. Why do I have to bow to those who move into this region when I can say, 'I was here first'. I will not take orders from those who move into this area. As long as there are speed limits, I will make sure this will waste everyone's time and money until there is a compromise. Winnfabs is telling me to go to the ocean which is 40 miles down the road. I'm telling Winnfabs to go to Squam lake which is 10 miles up the road.

Problem is Squam Lake do not want the likes of the Winnfabs folks. Having said that, why do I have to suffer?

If Mary Hutchins wants to represent the lake, She should talk to me and hundreds of others who live on this lake year round since birth. She will get a different answer.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BroadHopper For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-06-2011), Reilly (05-11-2011), Ryan (05-06-2011), Seaplane Pilot (05-06-2011)
Old 05-05-2011, 10:20 PM   #44
Dhuberty24
Senior Member
 
Dhuberty24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hooksett,NH
Posts: 82
Thanks: 11
Thanked 32 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Very well said.
Dhuberty24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 05:27 AM   #45
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Bill & Paula Bertholdt are extremely appreciative (as I am) for the 11 votes to ITL SB-27.

Here is their letter to the editor in today's LDS:


To the editor,

An open letter to the Honorable Members of the N.H. House Transportation Committee:

We are extremely appreciative of your 11 votes to ITL SB-27. The comments from both sides were well put to kill this bill, as the reps have listened to the N.H. people who want keep the 45/30 mph law as it is without any changes and certainly NOT to raise the limits to 55 mph on the Broads.

The recently released N.H. Marine Patrol Activity Data for 2010 showed even more improved accident and incident numbers than previous years. This, along with 2009 data, give additional evidence that the 45/30 mph law is indeed working from the Marine Patrol data perspective, from the perspective of hundreds of families, business/community leaders and N.H. individuals testifying of their vastly improved lake experiences through e-mails and phone calls.

We believe we have presented facts and data enough over the years that prove the 45/30 speed limits are working well and are appreciated and enjoyed by an overwhelming number of the general public and many Lakes Region businesses and associations. These reasonable limits allow the safe and comfortable access to Lake Winnipesaukee for the broadest spectrum of users.

We thank Representatives Cloutier, Dwinell, Gagnon, Hawkes, Hinch, Lindsley, Marcus, Rhodes, Scontsas, Tholl and Williams for understanding how much safety and sanity mean to most of us, individually and collectively. Your vote to ITL SB-27 and not allow any more amendments, committee studies or other attempts to change the current speed limits will be remembered by all who appreciate what you have done.

Please use your influence to persuade all members of the House, during the floor hearing we believe will be held on May 18, to see the common sense and logic of your positions. Meanwhile we hope that N.H. residents contact their respective N.H. House Reps to also urge them to support the ITL of Senate Bill 27 (to kill the bill).

We are forever in your debt.

Bill & Paula Bertholdt

Gilford
.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 08:19 AM   #46
DEJ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 328
Thanks: 242
Thanked 179 Times in 80 Posts
Default

To the editor,

An open letter to the members of the N.H. House of Representatives:

As you are no doubt aware by now, the House Transportation Committee voted 11-6 to declare the compromise SB-27 that would increase allowable speed on the area of Lake Winnipesaukee known as The Broads, ITL. The reason that the majority of the committee gave for their decision is that ďitís a local issue and the locals objectedĒ.

Without getting into the unethical and deceptive ways that opponents of SB-27 were able to create the illusion of local support, this is NOT a local issue. Lake Winnipesaukee is the largest lake in N.H. and the one of the largest, if not the largest, tourist draws for the stateís tourist industry. Decisions about the lake and its use affect everyone in New Hampshire.

If you go along with the thinking of the Transportation Committee you will be relinquishing state authority and decision making to local landowners who own property near our stateís prime resources, and because of this the legislature will be flooded with requests for bills in the future for restrictions of public use on public property of all types ďbecause the locals want it so itís a local issueĒ.

Do not open Pandoraís Box!

Safe Boaters of NH has provided you with facts and backed up those facts regarding the safe use of Lake Winnipesaukee for all boaters. We came up with the compromise that leaves 86-percent of Lake Winnipesaukee unchanged but opponents to the compromise SB-27 say that is not good enough, they want it all.

We urge you to support SB-27 when it gets to the floor and avoid opening Pandoraís Box, something that will touch off a stampede of bills restricting the public use of public property on the whim of private landowners.

Scott Verdonck

Safe Boater of New Hampshire
DEJ is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DEJ For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-06-2011), NoBozo (05-06-2011), ronc4424 (05-06-2011), Seaplane Pilot (05-06-2011)
Old 05-06-2011, 08:20 AM   #47
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Pretty much sums it up.

Lies vs truth.

Us vs them.

Winners = none
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
Seaplane Pilot (05-06-2011)
Old 05-06-2011, 08:35 AM   #48
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,434
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 196
Thanked 501 Times in 374 Posts
Default

With about 25 different public and private boat ramps, the lake is both a local and state lake. It is everybody's lake! With the popularity of low cost, second hand, used kayaks & paddles & pfd's over the last ten years it has become much less expensive and easier for people with less money to get out onto the Big Lake. You just tie the kayak onto the car roof and head for a local town dock. Launching a kayak off of a dock is pretty simple so the boat launch ramp is not even needed.

For a best bet-kayak launch spot, head to the Cattle Landing town dock and freebie (50-cars) unpaved parking lot that's way down the end of Meredith Neck. The Cattle Landing town dock is a 75' x 6' wide, public town dock, located across from the very south end of Bear Island and no, you will not be sharing the dock with any cows or cattle, as the cattle have all moved to Vermont. It has no town sign to identify it for some unknown reason, but you will know it when you see it, about seven miles down Meredith Neck.

Mixing high speed boats with little, slow moving kayaks is probably not the safest thing. There's an old saying that's been around for at least fifty years that says it all .......... "Speed Kills so Slow Down!"
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 08:50 AM   #49
Ryan
Senior Member
 
Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mass/Gilford
Posts: 247
Thanks: 216
Thanked 70 Times in 33 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
We believe we have presented facts and data enough over the years that prove the 45/30 speed limits are working well
Anybody care to try and back this up??? Where are the facts? Where is the data?

From what I've read, the facts and data to not back a speed limit that is working, especially with 2009 being one of the worst for accidents in recent history!
__________________
Please do not feel the trolls.
Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 10:17 AM   #50
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,809
Thanks: 2,326
Thanked 848 Times in 590 Posts
Default Bill and Paula Berthold

Moved from the Nashua area a decade ago. Commuted until they retire and they come up here with nothing better to do than rattle the natives cages.

Same with Sandy Helves. She commutes from Nashua.

If transients don't like the lake the way it is, move on. I've been here all my life and I'm not moving.
I was born here, I will die here.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 10:44 AM   #51
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadHopper View Post
Moved from the Nashua area a decade ago. Commuted until they retire and they come up here with nothing better to do than rattle the natives cages.

Same with Sandy Helves. She commutes from Nashua.

If transients don't like the lake the way it is, move on. I've been here all my life and I'm not moving.
I was born here, I will die here.
There is no "time of residency" requirement before you can have an opinion on local issues. Citizens that have lived in the lakes area for a few months have just as much say, and the same voting privileges, as those that have been here for 100 years. That's the way it works. It's the American way! It's the law!

I understand you think this is unfair. You don't have to like it. You DO have to live with it.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 11:36 AM   #52
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
There is no "time of residency" requirement before you can have an opinion on local issues. Citizens that have lived in the lakes area for a few months have just as much say, and the same voting privileges, as those that have been here for 100 years. That's the way it works. It's the American way! It's the law!

I understand you think this is unfair. You don't have to like it. You DO have to live with it.
BI, do you think the SL is confined to only being a "local issue"?

What do you consider about those like me who pay $$ for slips to use the lake using boats bought at a Winni dealer? I then pay additional money to stay at hotels with a slip on the lake ON TOP of having a slip on several weekend per year. In fact, I bet I pay more on fees and hotel bills than some of those who don't live on the water pay in property taxes!

Personally, I think when either side uses residency as part of the SL debate it's nothing more than an attempt to marginalize viewpoints. This goes for both sides of the argument however I have found the pro-SL crowd to fall into the "don't let MA people ruin our Lake" statements much more than the anti-SL crowd.

It should come down to what the SL does (or doesn't do) for the lake.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 12:52 PM   #53
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,809
Thanks: 2,326
Thanked 848 Times in 590 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
There is no "time of residency" requirement before you can have an opinion on local issues. Citizens that have lived in the lakes area for a few months have just as much say, and the same voting privileges, as those that have been here for 100 years. That's the way it works. It's the American way! It's the law!

I understand you think this is unfair. You don't have to like it. You DO have to live with it.
If that is the case, when are you going to tell the representatives to change the state motto from 'Live Free or Die' to 'The Police State'?
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 05:42 PM   #54
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
Personally, I think when either side uses residency as part of the SL debate it's nothing more than an attempt to marginalize viewpoints. This goes for both sides of the argument however I have found the pro-SL crowd to fall into the "don't let MA people ruin our Lake" statements much more than the anti-SL crowd.
"don't let MA people ruin our Lake"??????

Can you give me some objective evidence that this is true. By objective evidence I mean voice recordings, videos, or signed documents from the ďpro-SL crowdĒ. Also how many people are you talking about that have made that statement?
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2011, 08:32 AM   #55
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

For the life of me I don't know why the political director of the SBONH keeps dwelling on the elderly and well respected citizens of NH.
Below is a written letter to the editor of the LDS that sets the record straight as far as "the people who showed up in Concord to testify against SB-27":

To the editor,

In response to the letter from Bob Flannery, political director of SBONH, regarding speed and safety on Lake Winnipesaukee, I wanted to note that few of the people who showed up in Concord to testify against SB-27 are retired people. I take exception to his statement that "all these people have nothing but time on their hands," and his earlier statement after the Senate hearing on SB-27 that those testifying against SB 27 were "a bunch of old fossils with nothing better to do."

I, for example, work full-time, as does my husband and daughter, and we are not "old." Along with many other N.H. people, all three of us took the time to come to Concord to be heard on this issue. Business people as well came to testify how SB-27 is bad for the Lakes Region tourism and economy.

A man who delivers propane to the islands took the time to testify against SB-27. A representative from the Loon Preservation Society testified that SB-27 endangers fledgling loon chicks. Camp directors took the time to explain that with the 45/30 MPH law more and more campers are venturing out and enjoying the lake. I suspect that of the 73 out of 80 people who signed in against SB-27 last month, most were not retired ó they wanted their voice to be heard.

Safety is just one of the issues as to why to oppose SB-27. As noted above, other reasons include economics, tourism, preservation of the lake's natural resources, as well as maintaining a peaceful and meaningful lake experience for all. Add these reasons to the fact that the current 45/30 law is working well according to most N.H. people, and that says it all.

Gail Adams

Tuftonboro
.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2011, 09:57 AM   #56
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,809
Thanks: 2,326
Thanked 848 Times in 590 Posts
Default Tourism and boating

If the god almighty Winfabs claims tourism went through the roof, then why did PSC claim that tourism is down about 40% since its peak in 2005? Why did tourism was up 3% last year when neighboring Maine was up 14%. Facts speak louder than words, but god almighty Rusty Mclear, the ruling king of NH Tourism will not allow his industry to speak the truth? I am friends with a number of folks in the hospitality industry and they are all hurting. The would love to speak against the SL King but they fear reprisal.

If Boating is good, how come according to nh.gov boating registration been on a decline since 2005? It use to be slips were hard to find. This spring every marina on the lake has slips available. LADASUN and the Citizen are advertising private slips available. Last time marinas spoke against the SL, there was a huge split in the NH Marine Trade Association. After that fiasco, marinas are taking a neutral stanch for SL.

Summer camp enrollment is way down not because of speed, it is because of our litigious society. Litigation insurance hit the roof and camp fees became unbearable to those who really want to send their kids to camp. How came the camp directors won't speak the truth? That I am trying yo find the answer. They certainly not speaking for themselves.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BroadHopper For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-07-2011), Ryan (05-09-2011), Seaplane Pilot (05-07-2011)
Old 05-10-2011, 12:16 PM   #57
chipj29
Senior Member
 
chipj29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,859
Thanks: 496
Thanked 290 Times in 154 Posts
Default

I wonder if Rusty or Gail from Tuftonboro can answer my questions below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
To the editor,

In response to the letter from Bob Flannery, political director of SBONH, regarding speed and safety on Lake Winnipesaukee, I wanted to note that few of the people who showed up in Concord to testify against SB-27 are retired people. I take exception to his statement that "all these people have nothing but time on their hands," and his earlier statement after the Senate hearing on SB-27 that those testifying against SB 27 were "a bunch of old fossils with nothing better to do."

I, for example, work full-time, as does my husband and daughter, and we are not "old." Along with many other N.H. people, all three of us took the time to come to Concord to be heard on this issue. Business people as well came to testify how SB-27 is bad for the Lakes Region tourism and economy.

A man who delivers propane to the islands took the time to testify against SB-27.
How exactly does 10 additional MPH on the broads impact island propane delivery?
A representative from the Loon Preservation Society testified that SB-27 endangers fledgling loon chicks.
How exactly does an additional 10 MPH on the broads endanger loon chicks?
Camp directors took the time to explain that with the 45/30 MPH law more and more campers are venturing out and enjoying the lake.
How exactly would an additional 10 MPH on the broads prevent campers from venturing out and enjoying the lake? How many were venturing out before the speed limit was enacted? How many were venturing out after the speed limit was enacted? Please be specific.
I suspect that of the 73 out of 80 people who signed in against SB-27 last month, most were not retired ó they wanted their voice to be heard.
I am not retired, and I want my voice to be heard as well.

Safety is just one of the issues as to why to oppose SB-27.
How exactly does an additional 10 MPH on the broads impact safety?
As noted above, other reasons include economics, tourism, preservation of the lake's natural resources, as well as maintaining a peaceful and meaningful lake experience for all. Add these reasons to the fact that the current 45/30 law is working well according to most N.H. people, and that says it all.
Please be specific Gail. How exactly would an additional 10 MPH on the broads impact economics and tourism? How would it impact the lakes natural resources? How would it make the lake less peaceful or less of a meaningful experience? Again, please be specific.
Gail Adams
Tuftonboro
__________________
Getting ready for winter!
chipj29 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to chipj29 For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-10-2011), Ryan (05-10-2011), Seaplane Pilot (05-10-2011)
Old 05-11-2011, 10:01 AM   #58
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

The below Letter to the Editor is in today's Concord Monitor

Thank you Sandra for the good research and reporting that you are doing! Keep up the good work.

Hope for boaters

Sandra Helve, Meredith

For the Monitor

May 11, ..My family says "thank you!" to the 11 House Transportation Committee members who recommended killing Senate Bill 27 on May 4. Here's hoping that the full House on May 18 listens to their wisdom after hours of testimony, phone calls and hundreds of heartfelt emails urging the opposition of SB 27 which raises the existing 45 mph daytime boating speed limits on The Broads portion of Lake Winnipesaukee.

These committee members spoke fervently against SB 27 due to the volume of emails and calls against changing the current 45/30 mph law - because the 45/30 law is working extremely well; because numerous Lakes Region business and community leaders and other New Hampshire residents testified against this bill on April 19 (far many more than those in favor of the bill); because 45 mph is very fast on water yet allows safety for the much slower-moving watercraft like paddlers (moving at 1 to 2 mph) or sailors (5 to 10 mph) or those sitting still like anglers or families picnicking in an anchored boat; because Lake Winnipesaukee is not the place for high speed boating; because the 45/30 mph law was already arrived at through compromise; because 45/30 is better for the tourism (safe, family-friendly reputation) and other economics of the Lakes Region; and lastly and simply, because the 45/30 law enables both motorized and non-motorized boaters to enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee more!

Please contact your state representatives and encourage them to follow the recommendation of the House Transportation Committee. Let's leave the 45/30 law alone, as it is working beautifully: The Big Lake is a safe, fun and serene refuge for all

SANDRA HELVE

Meredith
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2011, 11:28 AM   #59
Chimi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 78
Thanks: 41
Thanked 35 Times in 22 Posts
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
The below Letter to the Editor is in today's Concord Monitor

Thank you Sandra for the good research and reporting that you are doing! Keep up the good work.

Hope for boaters

Sandra Helve, Meredith

For the Monitor

May 11, ..My family says "thank you!" to the 11 House Transportation Committee members who recommended killing Senate Bill 27 on May 4. Here's hoping that the full House on May 18 listens to their wisdom after hours of testimony, phone calls and hundreds of heartfelt emails urging the opposition of SB 27 which raises the existing 45 mph daytime boating speed limits on The Broads portion of Lake Winnipesaukee.

These committee members spoke fervently against SB 27 due to the volume of emails and calls against changing the current 45/30 mph law - because the 45/30 law is working extremely well; because numerous Lakes Region business and community leaders and other New Hampshire residents testified against this bill on April 19 (far many more than those in favor of the bill); because 45 mph is very fast on water yet allows safety for the much slower-moving watercraft like paddlers (moving at 1 to 2 mph) or sailors (5 to 10 mph) or those sitting still like anglers or families picnicking in an anchored boat; because Lake Winnipesaukee is not the place for high speed boating; because the 45/30 mph law was already arrived at through compromise; because 45/30 is better for the tourism (safe, family-friendly reputation) and other economics of the Lakes Region; and lastly and simply, because the 45/30 law enables both motorized and non-motorized boaters to enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee more!

Please contact your state representatives and encourage them to follow the recommendation of the House Transportation Committee. Let's leave the 45/30 law alone, as it is working beautifully: The Big Lake is a safe, fun and serene refuge for all

SANDRA HELVE

Meredith
She forgot to add the big "THANK YOU" to the Reps for disposing of the bill that would have required boat renters to have a full Boater Education Certificate. The big money has spoken again. She had better hope and pray that one of these renters with the marina-issued temporary licenses (read: toilet paper) does not run over and kill an innocent swimmer, boater, kayaker, fisherman, etc.

PS: Where's Bill Berthold when you need him? I recall him questioning whether someone was a registered voter in Gilford. Is Sandra Helve a registered voter in Meredith, Mr. Berthold? NOT!
Chimi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2011, 12:45 PM   #60
Chimi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 78
Thanks: 41
Thanked 35 Times in 22 Posts
Thumbs down What a surprise!

In this letter to ed, the famous Ms. Helve states she's from Nashua. How convenient!

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opini...el-praise.html
Chimi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2011, 04:03 PM   #61
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimi View Post
She forgot to add the big "THANK YOU" to the Reps for disposing of the bill that would have required boat renters to have a full Boater Education Certificate. The big money has spoken again. She had better hope and pray that one of these renters with the marina-issued temporary licenses (read: toilet paper) does not run over and kill an innocent swimmer, boater, kayaker, fisherman, etc.

PS: Where's Bill Berthold when you need him? I recall him questioning whether someone was a registered voter in Gilford. Is Sandra Helve a registered voter in Meredith, Mr. Berthold? NOT!
When you don't have good arguments against speed limits the next best thing is personal attacks against people that support them.

Sandy does live in Meredith, I have been to her home. She probably is not registered to vote in Meredith, but on the other hand she NEVER claimed to be.

And where did you get the idea that Sandy was against the Boater Education bill? Because I suspect you just made that up to try and make her look bad.

Bear Islander
Meredith
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2011, 05:09 PM   #62
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,809
Thanks: 2,326
Thanked 848 Times in 590 Posts
Default SL vs. Boater's Ed vs Marine Patrol budget

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post

And where did you get the idea that Sandy was against the Boater Education bill? Because I suspect you just made that up to try and make her look bad.
Why don't she mentioned that defeating the boater's education bill was a bad idea? How about cutting marine patrol budget, she should mentioned that was a bad idea. NOT! She just DON'T CARE!
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.

Last edited by BroadHopper; 05-11-2011 at 05:10 PM. Reason: spelling
BroadHopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2011, 09:37 PM   #63
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadHopper View Post
Why don't she mentioned that defeating the boater's education bill was a bad idea? How about cutting marine patrol budget, she should mentioned that was a bad idea. NOT! She just DON'T CARE!
By your logic, when someone writes a letter to the editor, they don't care about any topic they do not mention.

Sorry BH, that is an idiotic argument.

Go back a few posts and read the letter to the editor that Scott wrote on behalf of SBONH. He also didn't mention Boater Education or the Marine Patrol budget cuts. Does that mean he doesn't care? (I know that he does)

Incredibly neither of them wrote about the killing of Osama Bin Laden. I guess they just don't care about that either.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2011, 11:43 PM   #64
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,809
Thanks: 2,326
Thanked 848 Times in 590 Posts
Default Sbonh

SBONH did a press release on another thread denouncing the marine patrol budget cutback. You are right, Scott did not mentioned it in this thread. So technically you are not wrong. I have to find it but it is late, but I believe in the press, SBONH denounce the boater's education vote as well.

Winnfibs will not speak up for the boater's education bill mainly because thier two biggest backers, Merrill Fay and Jeff Thurston were against it.

Winnfibs will not speak against the marine patrol budget cut because they told the representatives that the lake is real peacie and safe. So the representatives thinks it is safe to reduce the marine patrol budget.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2011, 09:08 AM   #65
Chimi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 78
Thanks: 41
Thanked 35 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
When you don't have good arguments against speed limits the next best thing is personal attacks against people that support them.

Sandy does live in Meredith, I have been to her home. She probably is not registered to vote in Meredith, but on the other hand she NEVER claimed to be.

And where did you get the idea that Sandy was against the Boater Education bill? Because I suspect you just made that up to try and make her look bad.

Bear Islander
Meredith
Well then, I guess with your logic it's ok for Mr. Berthold of WinnFABS to make personal attacks by questioning the voting status of a gentleman from Gilford. See post 263 in this thread:

http://winnipesaukee.com/forums/show...erthold&page=3

I don't know Ms. Helve (nor do I care to), so I have no reason to make her "look bad". However, since WinnFABS claims they care about "Boating Safety" (part of their name!), I want to know why they chose to remain silent on this bill which would have required a full Boater Education license to rent a boat. HOW MANY innocent people will get hurt or killed by an unlicensed boat renter? Where is the safety?
Chimi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2011, 02:48 PM   #66
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimi View Post
Well then, I guess with your logic it's ok for Mr. Berthold of WinnFABS to make personal attacks by questioning the voting status of a gentleman from Gilford. See post 263 in this thread:

http://winnipesaukee.com/forums/show...erthold&page=3

I don't know Ms. Helve (nor do I care to), so I have no reason to make her "look bad". However, since WinnFABS claims they care about "Boating Safety" (part of their name!), I want to know why they chose to remain silent on this bill which would have required a full Boater Education license to rent a boat. HOW MANY innocent people will get hurt or killed by an unlicensed boat renter? Where is the safety?
It has been explained over, and over, and over, and over again, including several times right in this thread, that WinnFABS is only concerned with speed limits.

It was created for that one purpose.

Funds were raised to fight for that one purpose.

It is not for you to say what issues WinnFABS fights for.

You have lost on the issues. So now you attack your opponents.

You lost. Grow up. Get over it.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2011, 03:46 PM   #67
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,122
Thanks: 1,250
Thanked 1,375 Times in 688 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
It has been explained over, and over, and over, and over again, including several times right in this thread, that WinnFABS is only concerned with speed limits.

It was created for that one purpose.

Funds were raised to fight for that one purpose.

It is not for you to say what issues WinnFABS fights for.

You have lost on the issues. So now you attack your opponents.

You lost. Grow up. Get over it.
Sorry BI, but if you set up an organization that supports SLs in the name of safety, you can't ignore other safety issues. Doing so is disingenuous.
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
Chimi (05-12-2011)
Old 05-12-2011, 04:21 PM   #68
Chimi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 78
Thanks: 41
Thanked 35 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
It has been explained over, and over, and over, and over again, including several times right in this thread, that WinnFABS is only concerned with speed limits.

It was created for that one purpose.

Funds were raised to fight for that one purpose.

It is not for you to say what issues WinnFABS fights for.

You have lost on the issues. So now you attack your opponents.

You lost. Grow up. Get over it.
Man, this always hits a nerve with you, doesn't it. I didn't lose (the fat lady has not yet sung), I am grown up, and I will not get over it. You always toss out a red herring (personal attacks) because you can't handle the truth. I'm not suggesting what issues WinnFABS fights for, but perhaps they could have used a different name other than one which includes "BOATING SAFETY" if they really don't care about safety (which they/you don't). If it smells like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, guess what? It's a duck.
Chimi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2011, 07:12 PM   #69
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
Sorry BI, but if you set up an organization that supports SLs in the name of safety, you can't ignore other safety issues. Doing so is disingenuous.
What would be disingenuous would be to form an organization to fight just one issue, then branch out to fight other battles.

When you take donations for a specific cause you have no right to use that money to fight other causes.



This forum is supposed to be a place to discuss the pros and cons of speed limits. Do you guys have any arguments along those lines?
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2011, 08:22 PM   #70
topwater
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 302
Thanks: 85
Thanked 116 Times in 48 Posts
Default

Rusty, I asked you on another thread but you may not of seen it, so I'll ask you here. What type of boat and what size of a boat do you have? Thanks.
topwater is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to topwater For This Useful Post:
lawn psycho (05-13-2011)
Old 05-12-2011, 08:35 PM   #71
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,122
Thanks: 1,250
Thanked 1,375 Times in 688 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
This forum is supposed to be a place to discuss the pros and cons of speed limits. Do you guys have any arguments along those lines?
I was merely responding to your condescending post. You are stating your opinion of Winnfabs mission. I understood that the question was restated so that perhaps one of the the officers of Winnfabs would respond. You, in turn, told an adult to grow up.
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
Chimi (05-13-2011)
Old 05-13-2011, 05:29 PM   #72
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
You lost. Grow up. Get over it.
So is the speed limit about "winning" as some of the pro-SL crowd are about or doing something that makes a difference on the lake? Seems to be a rather smug comment.

Do you honestly think that if SB-27 does in fact get voted down by the NH House that the SL issue will be dead and gone?
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 11:02 AM   #73
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
So is the speed limit about "winning" as some of the pro-SL crowd are about or doing something that makes a difference on the lake? Seems to be a rather smug comment.

Do you honestly think that if SB-27 does in fact get voted down by the NH House that the SL issue will be dead and gone?
After years of NO LIMITS this debate has degenerated to asking for a 10 mph increase on one relativity small area of the lake. And you are not going to get even that. Polls show support for speed limits in the 80 to 90 percent range.

Speed limits are here to stay. The next change will be to make them State-wide.

After being defeated three times in a row, you will have a hard time getting any politicians to put their name on another anti-speed limit bill.

I'm sorry if this sounds smug. But the anti-SL movement is dead, dead, dead.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 11:50 AM   #74
NH_boater
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 298
Thanks: 14
Thanked 147 Times in 62 Posts
Default Agree

I am against the SL and I agree with the above post. This will be state wide soon.
NH_boater is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to NH_boater For This Useful Post:
NHBUOY (05-14-2011)
Old 05-14-2011, 12:20 PM   #75
Grandpa Redneck
Senior Member
 
Grandpa Redneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: White Mountain Area NH
Posts: 145
Thanks: 267
Thanked 106 Times in 55 Posts
Default Ditto

Quote:
Originally Posted by NH_boater View Post
I am against the SL and I agree with the above post. This will be state wide soon.
I Agree, I am against speed limits as well, even tho it really doesn't directly affect me, my boat tops out just over 30 mph, I really think just the 150 ft rule and the proper speed for conditions, when combined with some COMMON SENSE should be more than adequate for keeping things safe. But it seems to me that those with the "Flatlanda mentality" have no common sense, and think the Gov needs to regulate/legislate everything because they personally are incapable of sensible thought and action.
__________________
Freedom Lovin' gun crazy Redneck
Grandpa Redneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 12:49 PM   #76
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
After years of NO LIMITS this debate has degenerated to asking for a 10 mph increase on one relativity small area of the lake. And you are not going to get even that. Polls show support for speed limits in the 80 to 90 percent range.

Speed limits are here to stay. The next change will be to make them State-wide.

After being defeated three times in a row, you will have a hard time getting any politicians to put their name on another anti-speed limit bill.

I'm sorry if this sounds smug. But the anti-SL movement is dead, dead, dead.
OK, so if you believe the SL is here to stay then my next question is:

Which is easier to enforce, the 150 ft rule or the speed limit?

I don't think the lake will change one bit. The far, far majority of boats are basic bowriders. My guess is the 90% percentile of boats are in the 20-26 ft range and can't do the wild speeds that some of the pro-SL crowd has railed against and pretended as "the norm".

I still say the lake doesn't change one iota with or without a SL.

The helves, ELs, APS's of the world are still going to have high cortisol levels. LOL
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-14-2011)
Old 05-14-2011, 01:16 PM   #77
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
OK, so if you believe the SL is here to stay then my next question is:

Which is easier to enforce, the 150 ft rule or the speed limit?

I don't think the lake will change one bit. The far, far majority of boats are basic bowriders. My guess is the 90% pecentile of boats are in the 20-26 ft range and can't do the wild speeds that some of the pro-SL crowd has railed against.

I still say the lake doesn't change one iota with or without a SL.
Enforcement does not matter. I don't care if some boats speed now and then. It doesn't matter how many speeding tickets are handed out.

The speed limit sets a standard of behavior. Most people are law abiding. Yes, they like to go 75 ore even 80 on a highway with a 65 mph speed limit. Yet for the most part we obey the law because it is the law.

Laws are the written expression of our common morality. They tell us what is right and acceptable, as opposed to what is wrong and unacceptable.

People will, for the most part, obey the speed limits because they are the law. The few that violate them will know they are wrong, and their own guilt will have them looking for Marine Patrol boats around every corner.

Speed limits are self enforcing.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
ApS (06-24-2011)
Old 05-14-2011, 06:22 PM   #78
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

BI, your logic in your last post contradicts everything you have argued for in support of the SL.

If you believe (as do I) that most people abide by the law, then boater education and the 150 ft rule should negate the need for SL legislation. You can't have it both ways.....

The fact is, so few people were driving above 45 MPH without a speed limit that I hope you don't believe that all a sudden people are driving slower because of the SL.

I have said it over and over again, the SL won't change anything on the lake. Time for WinnFabs to shift gears and spend the next 6 years looking for the next "fix" to all those evil boats on Lake Winni. God only knows what they'll start hyperventilating about next
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
Chimi (05-14-2011), Grandpa Redneck (05-14-2011)
Old 05-14-2011, 06:39 PM   #79
Chimi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 78
Thanks: 41
Thanked 35 Times in 22 Posts
Default

It's obvious they care little about safety and speed. If they did, they'd be targeting any type of watercraft that exceeds 45mph. The simple fact that they never take issue with PWC's or any type of boat other than a performance boat is a clear indicator of their true agenda. I honestly think that they believed this "speed limit" law would eliminate performance boats on the lake. Everyone I know that has a performance boat is digging their heels in and is here to stay - speed limit be damned! They all own the lake just as much as any one of these speed limit supporters, so they are not going anywhere. Sorry to break the bad news to you, but this is how the bread is buttered.
Chimi is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Chimi For This Useful Post:
Grandpa Redneck (05-14-2011)
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 06:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.28662 seconds