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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-17-2011, 09:13 AM   #1
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default Believe It or Not! - More Anti-SL Legislation

SBONH has asked the legislature to form a committee to review existing laws pertaining to safety on Lake Winnipesaukee. Laws deemed to be unnecessary would be eliminated. SBONH has gone so far as to confirm that one of the laws that would be reviewed is the current Speed Limit.

Will it ever end!
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2011, 09:19 AM   #2
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 949
Thanked 592 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Who from SBOHN has confirmed this?
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2011, 09:57 AM   #3
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineedles View Post
Who from SBOHN has confirmed this?
The new president of SBONH. He is a member here.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2011, 10:57 AM   #4
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 573 Times in 178 Posts
Default Misinterpetation

Good Morning all,

Let me put a hault to this right away.

The discussion was on a bill to form a committee to review ALL laws and prioritize them based on safety.

With the continued budget cutting and the MP being rolled under the state police, SBONH is concerned that boating safety will be swept under the carpet.

The new sbonh president stated that this committee was to be designated to prioritize all laws (speed limit included now that it is a law) as well as safe passage etc. In no way was this to remove or discontinue any law. Simply a study for all boating laws. Some of which are quite outdated i.e. boats 28 ft and larger have to have a "mounted" brass bell. This was a coast guard regulation before back up air horns were invented.

So please before posting something that may be misinterpretted, please feel free to drop any sbonh member or board member a message. SBONH has its own website where questions can be asked even if you are not a member.

Thank you again for your concerns and interest in SBONH.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (10-23-2011), MAXUM (10-17-2011), Ryan (10-17-2011), Two dobys (10-17-2011)
Old 10-17-2011, 12:05 PM   #5
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE View Post
Good Morning all,

Let me put a hault to this right away.

The discussion was on a bill to form a committee to review ALL laws and prioritize them based on safety.

With the continued budget cutting and the MP being rolled under the state police, SBONH is concerned that boating safety will be swept under the carpet.

The new sbonh president stated that this committee was to be designated to prioritize all laws (speed limit included now that it is a law) as well as safe passage etc. In no way was this to remove or discontinue any law. Simply a study for all boating laws. Some of which are quite outdated i.e. boats 28 ft and larger have to have a "mounted" brass bell. This was a coast guard regulation before back up air horns were invented.

So please before posting something that may be misinterpretted, please feel free to drop any sbonh member or board member a message. SBONH has its own website where questions can be asked even if you are not a member.

Thank you again for your concerns and interest in SBONH.
Thank you for confirming what I wrote in my original post.

In strait speech "review and prioritize safety laws" means eliminate the speed limit. A law is either on the books or it is not. What is the point of reviewing and prioritizing existing laws if they are not going to be altered? Spin, Spin, Spin!

Why do we need to review a law that took effect only this past January and failed to be modified only this past spring? Could it be that you are looking for any possible means to kill the speed limit? That's what I think.

If you really want to "put a halt" to this kind of scrutiny all you need to do is stop trying to "back door" eliminate the speed limit.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
songkrai (06-04-2012)
Sponsored Links
Old 10-17-2011, 12:14 PM   #6
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 573 Times in 178 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
In strait speech "review and prioritize safety laws" means eliminate the speed limit.
I honestly do not know where you are getting this unless trying to cause a stir.

1. prioritize safety "laws" does not mean only one law. ALL LAWS to be reviewed.
2. This was a committee to focus on all safety regulations to be able to provide focus. With the current budget cuts we want to make sure that the MP has a study to show what laws will provide the most safety and list them accordingly. This way if there are further budget cuts the laws that are most helpful are statistically verified so they can be focused on.
3. Not stirring the pot but if the SL is so useful to safety then you have nothing to worry about even if this was the intention, which its not.
4. Due to budget cuts no committees are being formed on any topic so this is a mute point because the bill has been withdrawn.
5. It is safe to say with less resources it will be difficult to enforce all laws as competently as in the past. That being said a study showing what regulations are most helpful is only logical.
6. There are some out dated laws on the books that also need to be addressed. From our research and discussions there has never been an extensive review of all boating laws. It only makes sense that over time these should be reviewed to make sure we are utilizing current technology and not enforcing out dated or redundant regulations.

No need to spin every LSR that is safety related into a SL debate.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (10-23-2011)
Old 10-17-2011, 01:43 PM   #7
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,083
Thanks: 1,232
Thanked 1,364 Times in 679 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Thank you for confirming what I wrote in my original post.

In strait speech "review and prioritize safety laws" means eliminate the speed limit. A law is either on the books or it is not. What is the point of reviewing and prioritizing existing laws if they are not going to be altered? Spin, Spin, Spin!

Why do we need to review a law that took effect only this past January and failed to be modified only this past spring? Could it be that you are looking for any possible means to kill the speed limit? That's what I think.

If you really want to "put a halt" to this kind of scrutiny all you need to do is stop trying to "back door" eliminate the speed limit.
You would think wrong. I stand by my statement when I said prioritize (safe pasage and SL included), I did not say put them on the bottom of the list of priorities. I used the word as noted below.

pri·or·i·tize/prīˈôrəˌtīz/

Verb:

1.Designate or treat (something) as more important than other things: "prioritize your credit card debt".
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2011, 08:09 PM   #8
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Step 1 - Convince the Legislature to form a committee to review, analyze and prioritize Lake Winnipesaukee safety laws.

Step 2 - Convince that committee to find that speed limits are redundant or unenforceable or unnecessary or low priority or whatever else you can think of as long as it's bad.

Step 3 - Launch another anti-SL campaign using the committee findings as the backbone of the argument.

I don't believe in most conspiracy theories, but this goes beyond just a theory. This is obvious.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2011, 08:31 PM   #9
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 949
Thanked 592 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Oh give it a rest BI. Your mind must be in outer sapce already.
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pineedles For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (10-23-2011), VitaBene (10-18-2011)
Old 10-18-2011, 04:34 AM   #10
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,083
Thanks: 1,232
Thanked 1,364 Times in 679 Posts
Default

BI, I don't know what I can say that will placate you, but I will make this statement: while I am president of SBONH, there will be no attempts by said organization, front door or back door, to overturn or subvert the SL.

The SL is the law of the land now and I support it. I want everyone that recreates on our Lake to have a good experience, to have fun and be safe. I want the MP to enforce the laws that allow that.

What I (personally) don't care about is:

1. Someone that decides to drop anchor next to an island designated a wildlife sanctuary and sleeps aboard his/ her boat overnight.

2. That there are 4 boats tied together in a raft or that the rafted boats are too close to the ones next to them.

3. A boat over 26' having a bell onboard as a backup to their electric horn (a whistle or airhorn would be a perfectly acceptable substitute). The CG only requires a bell for boats longer than 60' IIRC.

Last edited by VitaBene; 10-18-2011 at 04:44 PM. Reason: spelling error
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (10-23-2011), Grandpa Redneck (10-19-2011), hazelnut (10-18-2011), LIforrelaxin (10-20-2011), MAXUM (10-18-2011), Ryan (10-18-2011)
Old 10-18-2011, 09:03 PM   #11
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Thanks: 503
Thanked 461 Times in 161 Posts
Default

Thanks VB for the clarification.
hazelnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2011, 10:36 PM   #12
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 1,911
Thanks: 176
Thanked 1,236 Times in 470 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Step 1 - Convince the Legislature to form a committee to review, analyze and prioritize Lake Winnipesaukee safety laws.

Step 2 - Convince that committee to find that speed limits are redundant or unenforceable or unnecessary or low priority or whatever else you can think of as long as it's bad.

Step 3 - Launch another anti-SL campaign using the committee findings as the backbone of the argument.

I don't believe in most conspiracy theories, but this goes beyond just a theory. This is obvious.
No offense but really this looks like the playbook that was used to get the SL passed in the first place.

Step1, convince the legislature, media and anyone else how the lake is completely out of control.

Step2, play on emotions surrounding a tragic accident, create a false impression that this was all due to thousands of go fast boats screaming around the lake completely out of control, and oh throw in as much dramatic language as possible even if most of it is embellished and fabricated.

Step3, launch a tasteless campaign to marginalize anyone who questions the need for such a speed limit , including smearing the character of some of the most outspoken critics instead of having a civil debate on the merits of the proposal.

I'm with ya, I don't believe in conspiracy theories either...
MAXUM is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post:
Biggus (02-05-2012), Grandpa Redneck (10-19-2011), Ryan (10-19-2011), Seaplane Pilot (10-19-2011)
Old 10-19-2011, 08:57 AM   #13
Seaplane Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 828
Thanks: 285
Thanked 423 Times in 165 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
No offense but really this looks like the playbook that was used to get the SL passed in the first place.

Step1, convince the legislature, media and anyone else how the lake is completely out of control.

Step2, play on emotions surrounding a tragic accident, create a false impression that this was all due to thousands of go fast boats screaming around the lake completely out of control, and oh throw in as much dramatic language as possible even if most of it is embellished and fabricated.

Step3, launch a tasteless campaign to marginalize anyone who questions the need for such a speed limit , including smearing the character of some of the most outspoken critics instead of having a civil debate on the merits of the proposal.

I'm with ya, I don't believe in conspiracy theories either...
Excellent post!
Seaplane Pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2011, 09:38 AM   #14
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
...I will make this statement: while I am president of SBONH, there will be no attempts by said organization, front door or back door, to overturn or subvert the SL.

The SL is the law of the land now and I support it...
That's good to hear!
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2011, 01:10 PM   #15
B R
Senior Member
 
B R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
SBONH has asked the legislature to form a committee to review existing laws pertaining to safety on Lake Winnipesaukee. Laws deemed to be unnecessary would be eliminated. SBONH has gone so far as to confirm that one of the laws that would be reviewed is the current Speed Limit.

Will it ever end!
And if the speed limit wasn't passed; do you really think WINFABS would have stopped trying to get one passed?

ohhh the hypocrisy.......
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
B R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2011, 02:32 PM   #16
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B R View Post
And if the speed limit wasn't passed; do you really think WINFABS would have stopped trying to get one passed?

ohhh the hypocrisy.......
Once again you miss the point. I am not a member of WinnFABS and never have been. And I supported the recent failed attempt to increase the speed limit.

Just two little facts you neglected.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2011, 09:23 AM   #17
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,926
Thanks: 187
Thanked 440 Times in 324 Posts
Default

And, what does SBONH really stand for as an acronym?


Speedy Boaters of New Hampshire


How's about a three hour time slot; Sundays: 10-1, when the SBONH sets up a high speed, optional zone with orange marker buoys running from Clay Point down to Treasure Island for performance boaters who just want to have a little fun? Could become a good go-to venue for slow-boaters and kayaks who just want to watch from a safe distance similar to the NH Speedway in Loudon.

"Set the water on fire........Sundays......10-1.......be there!!!"
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!

Last edited by fatlazyless; 10-20-2011 at 10:57 AM.
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2011, 12:27 PM   #18
Seaplane Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 828
Thanks: 285
Thanked 423 Times in 165 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
And, what does SBONH really stand for as an acronym?


Speedy Boaters of New Hampshire


How's about a three hour time slot; Sundays: 10-1, when the SBONH sets up a high speed, optional zone with orange marker buoys running from Clay Point down to Treasure Island for performance boaters who just want to have a little fun? Could become a good go-to venue for slow-boaters and kayaks who just want to watch from a safe distance similar to the NH Speedway in Loudon.

"Set the water on fire........Sundays......10-1.......be there!!!"
What does WINNFABS stand for as an acronym?

Winnipesaukee Fabricators of B... S...
Seaplane Pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2011, 01:17 PM   #19
Gavia immer
Senior Member
 
Gavia immer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 193
Thanks: 21
Thanked 19 Times in 11 Posts
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
BI, I don't know what I can say that will placate you, but I will make this statement: while I am president of SBONH, there will be no attempts by said organization, front door or back door, to overturn or subvert the SL.

The SL is the law of the land now and I support it. I want everyone that recreates on our Lake to have a good experience, to have fun and be safe. I want the MP to enforce the laws that allow that.

What I (personally) don't care about is:

1. Someone that decides to drop anchor next to an island designated a wildlife sanctuary and sleeps aboard his/ her boat overnight.

2. That there are 4 boats tied together in a raft or that the rafted boats are too close to the ones next to them.

3. A boat over 26' having a bell onboard as a backup to their electric horn (a whistle or airhorn would be a perfectly acceptable substitute). The CG only requires a bell for boats longer than 60' IIRC.
I don't see any earthshaking news in boating safety there.

Your "spelling error" got corrected by a factor of 13.4 FEET..
Gavia immer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2011, 02:20 PM   #20
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 573 Times in 178 Posts
Default

That is unfortunate that you are unable to draw the line from needless regulations that occupy marine patrol resources to those laws the need to be enforced.

Lets break it down very simply:

Would you rather have a MP officer patrolling rafting areas to ensure that each boat is anchored a minimum of 50 feet apart or have them on Patrol in areas where the most infractions occur of the safe passage law?

What is unfortunate is we have many laws that are not safety related (as you have pointed out in your post) that the Marine Patrol must enforce. With the budget being cut and resources being depleated it is important that the laws that are "safety" related are given the man power to make a difference and protect our lakes.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
OCDACTIVE is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (10-23-2011), LIforrelaxin (10-20-2011), Skipper of the Sea Que (01-03-2012)
Old 10-20-2011, 06:44 PM   #21
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 949
Thanked 592 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Bear Islander, you are responsible for starting this unwarranted thread! It is turning into a debate by pro and con that could turn into some really wild untrue accusations.

If you are concerned at all about winnepesaukee.com and getting beyond this devisive topic, you should shut your side of SL supporters down (whether you belong to winnfabs or not) with some more calming words than "That's good to hear!"
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 12:00 PM   #22
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineedles View Post
Bear Islander, you are responsible for starting this unwarranted thread! It is turning into a debate by pro and con that could turn into some really wild untrue accusations.

If you are concerned at all about winnepesaukee.com and getting beyond this divisive topic, you should shut your side of SL supporters down (whether you belong to winnfabs or not) with some more calming words than "That's good to hear!"
The purpose of a forum is to discuss topics. Very often those topics are divisive. Not all threads are going to be of the "The fall colors are beautiful" variety.

Respectful back and forth discussions on important lake issues makes winnipesaukee.com a vibrant, pertinent and useful part of the community in my opinion.

You claim this thread is unwarranted. I disagree. This is the speed limit forum and it has been admitted that the legislation I refereed to DOES pertain to speed limits.

I was happy to read VB's comments and I accept them at face value and hope they prove prophetic.

Last edited by Bear Islander; 10-23-2011 at 03:49 PM. Reason: spelling
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 01:15 PM   #23
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 949
Thanked 592 Times in 330 Posts
Default

Frankly I think the sub heading of SPEED LIMITS should be removed. I don't think there was much civil discourse, but I will say that you didn't engage in the over the top comments, as did others. Since the speed limit is here to stay, I would advocate removing the topic from the Lake Issues area. JMO.
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 04:00 PM   #24
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 21
Thanked 348 Times in 163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineedles View Post
Frankly I think the sub heading of SPEED LIMITS should be removed. I don't think there was much civil discourse, but I will say that you didn't engage in the over the top comments, as did others. Since the speed limit is here to stay, I would advocate removing the topic from the Lake Issues area. JMO.
Speaking of "civil discourse" I just have to point out that the only cheap shot or personal comment in this thread was yours in post number 9.

Even if speed limits are here to stay there still is a need to evaluate how well or how poorly they are being enforced. And how speed limits effect the lake, boating and the lake community. In particular the economic impart of speed limits are of particular interest to many people including myself. This is a topic that will be ongoing for some time.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2011, 05:27 PM   #25
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,704
Thanks: 2,222
Thanked 816 Times in 568 Posts
Default Economic impact

Plymouth state University uses statistics from room and meals tax collection, surveys and other data. It is a known fact posted here and in NH Business Review, the state as a whole did not do as well as the surrounding states in increasing tourist revenue. NH revenue increase from last year was only 4% when ther other states showed 8% and more. Many hotels and restuarants have closed. I heard the Balsams Resort is closed.
PSU will not give statistics by region, but I heard in the LOB halls that room and meals collection this year is far below expectations.

NH Hospitality Assoc. and NH marine Trade Assoc. have not made comments about the economy since the SL debates. This make you wonder what Mclear and Thurston who are the principals are trying to hide.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2011, 07:16 AM   #26
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 949
Thanked 592 Times in 330 Posts
Default

BI, not a cheap shot. A reference to your space trip. Meant to be funny. Oh forget it.
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2011, 08:46 PM   #27
pm203
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 223
Thanks: 38
Thanked 84 Times in 45 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadHopper View Post
Plymouth state University uses statistics from room and meals tax collection, surveys and other data. It is a known fact posted here and in NH Business Review, the state as a whole did not do as well as the surrounding states in increasing tourist revenue. NH revenue increase from last year was only 4% when ther other states showed 8% and more. Many hotels and restuarants have closed. I heard the Balsams Resort is closed.
PSU will not give statistics by region, but I heard in the LOB halls that room and meals collection this year is far below expectations.

NH Hospitality Assoc. and NH marine Trade Assoc. have not made comments about the economy since the SL debates. This make you wonder what Mclear and Thurston who are the principals are trying to hide.
The Winnfab crowd has done far more damage than was anticipated.
pm203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2011, 11:08 AM   #28
LIforrelaxin
Senior Member
 
LIforrelaxin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island, not that one, the one on Winnipesaukee
Posts: 2,127
Thanks: 753
Thanked 592 Times in 314 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pm203 View Post
The Winnfab crowd has done far more damage than was anticipated.
Having the highest meals and room tax has done most of the damage me thinks...
__________________
Life is about how much time you can spend relaxing... I do it on an island that isn't really an island.....
LIforrelaxin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2011, 11:41 PM   #29
jbreault
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default $peed Limit

I am new to this forum, but a longtime boater on Winnipesaukee (over 50 years) and a High Performance Boating enthusiast. I was disappointed when the SL Law passed and then re-affirmed without much consideration for the SAFE enjoyment of high performance boating on Lake Winnipesaukee. This surely contributed to the economic downturn in the area. However, most high performance boats are owned by small business owners who have been crushed by the collapse of our financial system due to the real estate bubble that is now imploding. The economic impact of the speed limit is relatively minor in comparison. The question that needs to be asked is "will these small business owners return to the lakes region when the real estate market and the economy improves"? Probably not the ones that enjoy high performance boating. Perhaps many people think the Lake is better place without them???
jbreault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2012, 04:06 PM   #30
pm203
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 223
Thanks: 38
Thanked 84 Times in 45 Posts
Default

There still are a lot of HP boats on the lake. The SL really hasn't made much a difference that way. However, all of the negative publicity coupled with the false scare tatics made by the SL supporters probably have scared some people off. All that BS about cowboys and safety painted the lake in a negative manner.
pm203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2012, 07:08 PM   #31
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,415
Thanks: 949
Thanked 592 Times in 330 Posts
Default

so.... what do you think the SL has accomplished?
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2012, 09:29 PM   #32
pm203
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 223
Thanks: 38
Thanked 84 Times in 45 Posts
Default

Quite frankly? Nothing good.
pm203 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pm203 For This Useful Post:
jposta (08-19-2012), Pineedles (01-03-2012)
Old 01-03-2012, 03:45 AM   #33
Joe Kerr
Senior Member
 
Joe Kerr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 92
Thanks: 23
Thanked 16 Times in 5 Posts
Angry What did the speed limit do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineedles View Post
so.... what do you think the SL has accomplished?
IMHO the speed limit has not made the Lake any safer. It has caused a serious amount of ill will, negative publicity and false impressions. Among some it created a false sense of security. It has polarized both boaters and non-boaters and generated animosity.

What is worse, I believe it has changed the atmosphere of this site. Winnipesaukee dot com is just not the same. I do not have a Go Fast boat. Never did. I regret how the whole Speed Limit situation has irreversibly changed this forum which I loved so much. It took away something very special.

No Joke
__________________
~ Joe Kerr
Joe Kerr is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Joe Kerr For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (03-23-2012), NHBUOY (01-03-2012), Pineedles (01-03-2012), pm203 (01-03-2012), Skipper of the Sea Que (01-03-2012), Sue Doe-Nym (01-03-2012)
Old 03-22-2012, 09:37 PM   #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 Joe Kerr View Post
IMHO the speed limit has not made the Lake any safer. It has caused a serious amount of ill will, negative publicity and false impressions. Among some it created a false sense of security. It has polarized both boaters and non-boaters and generated animosity.

What is worse, I believe it has changed the atmosphere of this site. Winnipesaukee dot com is just not the same. I do not have a Go Fast boat. Never did. I regret how the whole Speed Limit situation has irreversibly changed this forum which I loved so much. It took away something very special.

No Joke
SL just increased the divide between lot owners and lake users IMO. So, the divide on this site just mirrors reality.

I've been on this site a long-time and there has always been that undertone of us vs them. The SL just painted the elephant bright yellow and put a bullhorn on its trunk. False sense of entitlement.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 04:03 AM   #35
songkrai
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 683
Thanks: 34
Thanked 139 Times in 93 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Thank you for confirming what I wrote in my original post.

In strait speech "review and prioritize safety laws" means eliminate the speed limit. A law is either on the books or it is not. What is the point of reviewing and prioritizing existing laws if they are not going to be altered? Spin, Spin, Spin!

Why do we need to review a law that took effect only this past January and failed to be modified only this past spring? Could it be that you are looking for any possible means to kill the speed limit? That's what I think.

If you really want to "put a halt" to this kind of scrutiny all you need to do is stop trying to "back door" eliminate the speed limit.
What a waste of time and resources. No hidden agenda?

What do these folks do down there in Concord?

Yes, we do need a congressional committee to review whether a boat needs a brass bell or not. Study it. Bring in a bunch of brass bells to the hearings. Ding them all. Check the decibal readings on all. Study the composition of brass bells versus steel bells. Set minimum size for all. Bring in the brass bell industry to testify. Bring in the brass bell lobbyists. Make a report. Publish the report.

Yes, yes, yes. Study all. We do need another study.

Can we get the names of the folks on this committee? I'd like to see the minutes of such committee posted some place.
songkrai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2012, 07:52 PM   #36
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,083
Thanks: 1,232
Thanked 1,364 Times in 679 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by songkrai View Post
What a waste of time and resources. No hidden agenda?

What do these folks do down there in Concord?

Yes, we do need a congressional committee to review whether a boat needs a brass bell or not. Study it. Bring in a bunch of brass bells to the hearings. Ding them all. Check the decibal readings on all. Study the composition of brass bells versus steel bells. Set minimum size for all. Bring in the brass bell industry to testify. Bring in the brass bell lobbyists. Make a report. Publish the report.

Yes, yes, yes. Study all. We do need another study.

Can we get the names of the folks on this committee? I'd like to see the minutes of such committee posted some place.
In the power Squadron, they are known as a "bell in a box" because that is where most are kept!
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2012, 09:33 AM   #37
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,516
Thanks: 41
Thanked 628 Times in 258 Posts
Default

Vitabene...

Mine is def a "Bell In The Box"! LOL! the chances of me being out on the lake in a fogged in situation are pretty much slim to none. Although If I were an ocean boater that would be a different story.

Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2012, 08:20 PM   #38
codeman671
Senior Member
 
codeman671's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,474
Thanks: 91
Thanked 361 Times in 228 Posts
Default

I chuckled on Sunday when I put our "bell in a box" on our new boat. It never left the box when I bought our last Monterey in 05, it is still in the box to go in this one even though a few years have passed between larger boats where it was needed.
codeman671 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 06:05 AM   #39
jrc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hollis/Gilford
Posts: 2,688
Thanks: 33
Thanked 437 Times in 247 Posts
Default

Since the people at SBONH are busy and involve in boater safety, maybe they should take a look at the equipment requirements for NH boats? There are subtle differences between the NH requirments, and the USCG. Some might make sense to adjust like this one.
jrc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 09:02 AM   #40
OCDACTIVE
Senior Member
 
OCDACTIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 573 Times in 178 Posts
Default Good news!

SBONH petitioned the NH Marine Patrol to remove the inland requirement of the "brass bell".

This requirement was part of administration rules and not an RSA.

At the beginning of this years legislative session the Marine Patrol at the request of SBONH submitted to have this rule removed. Since that time the rules have been approved and just awaiting final signature, which will not happen until this coming fall. So it should be changed by the 2013 boating season.

I was going to wait to announce this until it is official, however seeing this conversation I thought I would mention that SBONH has be conducting a full review of all rules and RSA's that may be obsolete on inland waterways.

Please remember this change is NOT official as of yet, so please continue to carry your bell until further notice.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?

Last edited by OCDACTIVE; 06-13-2012 at 09:57 AM. Reason: grammer
OCDACTIVE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 12:34 PM   #41
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,348
Thanks: 412
Thanked 719 Times in 499 Posts
Default

We have a big mounted bell in our boat but it isn't brass. It is silver colored. It rings when it is really rough. This can drive you crazy. It would be nice not to have it there, but I wouldn't take it off, it came with the boat.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 02:13 PM   #42
jrc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hollis/Gilford
Posts: 2,688
Thanks: 33
Thanked 437 Times in 247 Posts
Default

The bell makers guild will sue!
jrc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2012, 05:15 PM   #43
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,348
Thanks: 412
Thanked 719 Times in 499 Posts
Default

I know! Guess it must meet approval though. We never got a ticket for a silver bell instead of a brass bell!!
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2012, 12:21 PM   #44
gtagrip
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 301
Thanks: 115
Thanked 75 Times in 52 Posts
Default

You know, I got a ticket for not having a bell when we upgraded in size form a 24' to 30'. MP told me that for nay boat in size 26' and over needs to have a bell on board and under 26' does not. So, why does a 26' boat needs a bell and under 26' does not need a bell? I have never figured this one out.

I guess it's O.K. to be stuck in the fog in a boat under 26' but not O.K. in a boat over 26'? Where's the logic?
gtagrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 04:08 PM   #45
XCR-700
Senior Member
 
XCR-700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andover, MA
Posts: 332
Thanks: 152
Thanked 109 Times in 51 Posts
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Will it ever end!
Why should it ever end, just because supporters of a bill got it through that means the issue is now frozen for all time?

How about the folks who were in opposition or are now, they don't have a right to try to change the rules as did the first group???

Interesting perspective,,,
XCR-700 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to XCR-700 For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (07-22-2012), lawn psycho (07-21-2012), Webbsatwinni (07-21-2012)
Old 08-01-2012, 07:13 AM   #46
pm203
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 223
Thanks: 38
Thanked 84 Times in 45 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
Why should it ever end, just because supporters of a bill got it through that means the issue is now frozen for all time?

How about the folks who were in opposition or are now, they don't have a right to try to change the rules as did the first group???

Interesting perspective,,,
And we will.
pm203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2012, 07:37 AM   #47
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH / Bozeman MO
Posts: 4,704
Thanks: 2,222
Thanked 816 Times in 568 Posts
Default Take a look

at my signature. The constitution gives us the rights to pursue.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to BroadHopper For This Useful Post:
Little Bear (08-06-2012)
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 -5. The time now is 04:12 PM.


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

This page was generated in 0.60619 seconds