Coming This Summer: Speed Limit

[zawillif]

Sorry if this has been posted already. I did a quick search and found nothing. Looks like a speed limit is coming: 45mph daytime, 25mph nighttime.

http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007105100232

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by zawillif

Sorry if this has been posted already. I did a quick search and found nothing. Looks like a speed limit is coming: 45mph daytime, 25mph nighttime.

http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007105100232

Try reading some of the threads/posts in the Speed Limit section:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...splay.php?f=19

[ApS]

Gee....All those "challenges", "concerns", "hazards". "necessity", "complications", "confusing", "lengthy", and "problems".

This innovative program seemed like such a great idea just two months ago, too.

[Mark]

Originally Posted by zawillif

Sorry if this has been posted already. I did a quick search and found nothing. Looks like a speed limit is coming: 45mph daytime, 25mph nighttime.
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007105100232

At last there will be safe places for kayakers and other boaters scared of go fast be loud boats. What's next? A speed limited boating path so they can get from a launch area to the speed limit areas to enjoy their perceived safe boating?

What if there are more violations in the speed limit areas? Is that proof that limits are not needed OR is it set up as a conspiracy by anti-speed limit zealots?

[fatlazyless]

Concerning the inside Bear Island passage which is about two miles long and has a no wake zone at the north end and a 100 yard wide narrows between the markers at the south, is a speed limit needed here? No way! What's the plan going to show or prove or disprove here? Seems like a big waste of time for the Marine Patrol.

[AC2717]

one question,
where is the safety going to be if Marine patrol is radaring boats while an accident happens or something worse? I dunno I do not travel very fast to begin with on my boat, and I am not concerned about what others do as long as my family's safety in not compromised, it should be up to the discretion of MP to pull people over to speed and stupid moves, not mandated, That is what they are there for to protect everyone from those people not to act as traffic cops on a highway, wouldn't that mean they would have to be called Marine Police instead of Marine Patrol?

With the current gas prices I do not think they are going to be too successful in this campaign to begin with

[SeaBass]

I used to cruise 25-30mph through this spot. Looks like it is time to power up the Mercs and sporadiacally stop and start during this passage to simulate a large slow moving vessel.

This is a waste of time for the marine patrol and in no way will improve safety concerns of large wakes for Kayakers or whatever.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Mark

At last there will be safe places for kayakers and other boaters scared of go fast be loud boats. What's next? A speed limited boating path so they can get from a launch area to the speed limit areas to enjoy their perceived safe boating?

What if there are more violations in the speed limit areas? Is that proof that limits are not needed OR is it set up as a conspiracy by anti-speed limit zealots?

I hope you are kidding... If anyone is spinning conspiracy theories it is the proponents. Fast boats are the root of all evil, Winni is a dangerous place overrun by maniacs in large boats, kayakers are not safe here, families are no longer welcome in the lakes region, tourists are scared to come, the tooth fairy and santa claus are real, money grows on trees, etc... We have heard it all before. Seems to me that more people die each year in kayak accidents that are not powerboat related than at the hands of GFBL's...

[fatlazyless]

Speaking for myself, this kayaker and smaller than 12' (11',11 3/4" not counting the rudder which doesn't count) sailboater definately likes the big waves.....the bigger the better...big waves are big fun...so wave-making is strongly encouraged!

Said the gfbl'er: "duh sailboat....waht sailboat....with great big sails....nevuh saw it."

Who knows, maybe this speed zone could make some waves?

[offmycloud]

This is just a way to raise money so the government can keep expanding. The license thing has the same purpose. These both will not increase the safety of the lake one iota but will bring in tons of revenue through fines which will allow the government and law enforcement to grow larger.

[Cal]

The speed zones are nothing more than a way to implement a lake wide limit without causing an outcry from the opponents to the limits. They do it in steps so it doesn't seem so bad to swallow Whereas if they passed a lake wide speed limit right away the "fast" crowd would be whining as bad as the proponent. The general public doesn't have the time or resourses for a continued battle to have things their way and the government knows it. Mark my words , next year there will be increased speed limit areas. I've seen the same thing here with seat belts , cell phones , smoking and even local , over inflated , school budgets that we've voted down three times and still get stuck with
Ok , I've got other things to do today so I'll get off my soap box and leave it open for others

[jrc]

So if they are really doing a test this summer, what constitutes a successful test? If no boats are observed exceeeding the limit, is that a success or failure? If no boats are ticketed is that a success? If 100 boats are ticketed? A thousand?

If the judge throws out some or all of the tickets because the rule is somehow not proper? Or the areas are not marked well enough? Or radar isn't reliable enough? Are these successes or failures?

It's obvious that these successes or failures can be spun.

Imagine this line of thinking: The MP says that they couldn't issue many tickets because it was too hard to determine if the offending boat was in the speed zone or not. Conlusion: we must enlarge the the speed zone to the entire lake.

Imagine this: The MP says we didn't issue any tickets because we never observed a boat exceeding the speed limit. Conclusion: speed limits are effective because they kept the speeding boats off the lake. Make speed limits lakewide and permanent.

Or imagine the opposite facts: The MP says we issued 100 tickets to boats we observed breaking the speed limit. Conclusion: speed limits are effective but not strong enough. Make speed limits lakewide and permanent.

[offmycloud]

Originally Posted by Cal

The speed zones are nothing more than a way to implement a lake wide limit without causing an outcry from the opponents to the limits. They do it in steps so it doesn't seem so bad to swallow Whereas if they passed a lake wide speed limit right away the "fast" crowd would be whining as bad as the proponent. The general public doesn't have the time or resourses for a continued battle to have things their way and the government knows it. Mark my words , next year there will be increased speed limit areas. I've seen the same thing here with seat belts , cell phones , smoking and even local , over inflated , school budgets that we've voted down three times and still get stuck with
Ok , I've got other things to do today so I'll get off my soap box and leave it open for others

Next the food police arrive! They are doing it in Chicago - there are shootings every day but the pols would rather focus their attention on banning trans fats and foie gras!

[Cal]

Wonder if radar detectors work in boats? This could be a good test . They also sell jammers

[Rattlesnake Islander]

Maybe the marine patrol picked these two spots for the same reasons some people say, they are useless. If the areas are to small or they are slowed because there are no wake zones, then the chances of people speeding there are slim. So when they send their report to the committee next year and say "we wrote no tickets in our test areas, therefore a speed limit is not called for."
Just my opinion after talking to a marine patrol officer friend of mine.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by codeman671

"...If anyone is spinning conspiracy theories it is the proponents. Fast boats are the root of all evil, Winni is a dangerous place overrun by maniacs in large boats, kayakers are not safe here, families are no longer welcome in the lakes region..."

Something has definitely changed: any given July or August weekend would find one or two boats anchored directly off my lakefront around picnic-time and early afternoon.

In my absence a few years ago, an alarmed neighbor sent me a photo of a raft of five boats, asking me if I was concerned. I replied that they were anchored far enough from my waterline foot valve, and that's all that would concern me.

Except for one "overnighter", nobody has anchored or picnicked along this entire mile of shoreline for years.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Cal

Wonder if radar detectors work in boats? This could be a good test . They also sell jammers

1) Radar doesn't work on boats: it's on the Internet.

2) You can buy jammers, but the FCC says that using them is illegal.
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/transportation/radar.htm

3) Using exact GPS coordinates, maybe a savvy Director Barrett will position two MP boats off Rattlesnake Island, select two appropriate points on Rattlesnake—and, using a stopwatch—determine speeds.

Old-tech beats new-tech!

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

3) Using exact GPS coordinates, maybe a savvy Director Barrett will position two MP boats off Rattlesnake Island, select two appropriate points on Rattlesnake—and, using a stopwatch—determine speeds.

Old-tech beats new-tech!

Sounds ok in theory and it may work on the road with pre-measured distances but I doubt it would work on water. What about drifting of the MP boats, maintaining a constant angle of sight at the points on land, and the obvious visual deterrant of the MP boats in the first place which would probably slow someone down anyhow. There is no way to constantly maintain an exact distance (or even a close one) between the two boats to time between either. They will need to go hi-tech in order to make this happen at any level of true effectiveness.

I am going to see him at a wedding next weekend, I will ask him directly if I get a chance.

[fatlazyless]

107 mph in a boat!........WOW......methinks I am jealous!......I wonder what going 107mph in a boat is like? Probably had to be on a cool and calm day with little other boat traffic around. Maybe Wal-Mart sells a 12" battery operated scale model that's radio controlled which would be more in my league. Posssible, could be used to harass the Mergansers away, or something.

Hey Acres, think you ever saw this 28' skater roaring down the broads at 100mph plus........got any photos?

Is the fastest boat on the lake now up for sale in the classified? A 28' skater powered by two 300hp Merc's for the very reasonable and maybe even low Wal-Mart price of 80K. Heck, if it were not for the impending speed limit zone right at my front door, I would jump at this opportunity. 107mph.....now that would definately change my attitude about the need for speed........yeah.......and keep dreaming!

Ever seen one of those local police D.A.R.E. vehicles, like a Hemi Super-Bee yellow pickup, or a Vette turned into a police car. Over in the classified, there'a 28' twin-hull Cat set up with two Merc 300hp two-strokes! Lighweight, and nimble; just what the Marine Patrol could use for catching up to a burnt out navigation lightbulb or a registration sticker of the wrong color.

A boat like this must just inhale gasoline...............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm-bbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by codeman671

"...There is no way to constantly maintain an exact distance (or even a close one) between the two boats to time between either. They will need to go hi-tech in order to make this happen at any level of true effectiveness..."

1) Drifting would be essentially simultaneous/synchronous if the boats are the same—or linked together by a line. The only "high-tech" required would be GPS to occasionally restore position. A pair of different points on the same shore could be a check, using stop watches with a "two-lap" capability. Parallax errors can be minimized (though tiny anyway), and could still be computed.

2) There's also no reason that two MPs can't be situated on shore using two measured points on the opposite shore. Just as in radar, any error there would be fully in the offenders favor.

One stopwatch: it needn't be any more "high-tech" than that!

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

1) Drifting would be essentially simultaneous/synchronous if the boats are the same—or linked together by a line. The only "high-tech" required would be GPS to occasionally restore position. A pair of different points on the same shore could be a check, using stop watches with a "two-lap" capability. Parallax errors can be minimized (though tiny anyway), and could still be computed.

2) There's also no reason that two MPs can't be situated on shore using two measured points on the opposite shore. Just as in radar, any error there would be fully in the offenders favor.

One stopwatch: it needn't be any more "high-tech" than that!

The MP boats already have Raymarine radar. It can track the bearing, speed and distance of 24 boats simultaneously and is not affected by relative bearing like police radar. It is much more high tech than anything used in a police car. Checking speed with it is quite easy but I'm pretty sure it's not approved for use as a speed measuring tool and would have to be backed up with sworn witness testimony and speed estimates.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

1) Drifting would be essentially simultaneous/synchronous if the boats are the same—or linked together by a line. The only "high-tech" required would be GPS to occasionally restore position. A pair of different points on the same shore could be a check, using stop watches with a "two-lap" capability. Parallax errors can be minimized (though tiny anyway), and could still be computed.

2) There's also no reason that two MPs can't be situated on shore using two measured points on the opposite shore. Just as in radar, any error there would be fully in the offenders favor.

One stopwatch: it needn't be any more "high-tech" than that!

Yeah, good luck with that... Do you honestly think it is that easy? It is completely not practical in a real life situation.

Obviously you are much smarter than the system in place if you think it can be implemented that easy. I am really not trying to criticize the capabilities of the MP but your methods are a bit too scientific on paper to be used in a real life situation. They need hard data that is proven electronically to be able to make tickets stand up in court. Otherwise they are wasting taxpayers as well as the courts time.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

"...Hey Acres, think you ever saw this 28' skater roaring down the broads at 100mph plus........got any photos? Is the fastest boat on the lake now up for sale in the classified? A 28' skater powered by two 300hp Merc's for the very reasonable and maybe even low Wal-Mart price of 80K..."

I am reading about a crowd-pleasing 37-foot Skater on Lake Winnipesaukee, at 125-MPH+. That would be faster, but there's no sign of your sighting. All I have is Skater undersides and a few debris fields. While I do have photos of Skaters, I presume you want one that's right-side up?

Maybe a Sonic located near my Winnipesaukee place is faster, with its three big outboards? It has a very distinct sound and—though relatively quiet and depending on ambient noises—can be heard from a mile or more away. (Pretty far for an outboard-powered vessel).

Could you provide a URL or ad# of your sighting?

Originally Posted by Dave R

"...The MP boats already have Raymarine radar. It can track the bearing, speed and distance of 24 boats simultaneously and is not affected by relative bearing like police radar. It is much more high tech than anything used in a police car. Checking speed with it is quite easy but I'm pretty sure it's not approved for use as a speed measuring tool and would have to be backed up with sworn witness testimony and speed estimates.

Meaning, "Don't look for any successful speeding prosecutions for a year or two"?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Meaning, "Don't look for any successful speeding prosecutions for a year or two"?

Well, if someone were to challenge a ticket, they'd have to ask how the radar is calibrated etc. That would end that coiurt session in a hurry. However, if a ticket is just mailed in with a check, that would be a successful prosecution.

Anyone know if the MPs have even written a ticket yet?

[fatlazyless]

Haven't got anything intelligent to say. Think maybe I saw the Skater that's for sale yesterday, white w/ red trim. Didn't have any 'for sale ' signs. While the big vee hull go-fasts roar around, the Skater makes a buzzing sound......buzz...buzzz....buzzz....like a big chainsaw.

Hey, today's www.citizen.com says the speed limit zones' starting time have been pushed back till Aug 1 due a legislative process issue, or something. The screws of politics maybe cannot get a grip on this one.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

The 42' was out this morning between the snake and sleepers, and I couldn't help but notice they were leveling the radar gun at me. Hope they recorded my 25 mph speed!

[Silver Duck]

Actually, it would be fairly straight forward to calibrate the Raymarines:
1. Turn a few handheld GPSs into "transfer standards" by comparing their readings (on land) to radar guns which have been shown to be accurate and whose readings are acceptable in court.
2. Put those GPSs aboard boats and make repetitive test runs past the Raymarines at a range of speeds, while documenting both the GPS readings and the Raymarine readings. (I'd do this using multiple GPS-carrying boats travelling in multiple directions concurrrently.)
3. If the GPS readings agree with the Raymarine readings, you've calibrated the Raymarines and the data they produce should be acceptable in court.

Silver Duck

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

Actually, it would be fairly straight forward to calibrate the Raymarines:
1. Turn a few handheld GPSs into "transfer standards" by comparing their readings (on land) to radar guns which have been shown to be accurate and whose readings are acceptable in court.
2. Put those GPSs aboard boats and make repetitive test runs past the Raymarines at a range of speeds, while documenting both the GPS readings and the Raymarine readings. (I'd do this using multiple GPS-carrying boats travelling in multiple directions concurrrently.)
3. If the GPS readings agree with the Raymarine readings, you've calibrated the Raymarines and the data they produce should be acceptable in court.

Silver Duck

You know and I know this would work fine and make reasonably accurate measurements, but a lawyer would have a field day with this method. This method basically has a radar set calibrated by a GPS device which is calibrated by a hand held radar unit which is calibrated by a standard in some lab. Too many links in that chain and too many opportunities for error to prosecute someone unless they were grossly over the speed limit, in which case testimony alone would probably suffice.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Dave R

Well, if someone were to challenge a ticket, they'd have to ask how the radar is calibrated etc. That would end that coiurt session in a hurry.

Next time on the Lake, why not visit one of the MPs doing the speed checks and ask how they are calibrated...

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...321/-1/CITIZEN

[fatlazyless]

Hey there girls & boys, quite a few very opinionated personal follow up replies appear in today's www.unionleader.com article about the proposed speed limit zones and the MP. If anyone wants to get their thoughts about this published in NH's largest newspaper, here's an opportunity.

"Dear Union Leader, If God had wanted us humans to travel thru the water at 75 mph, we'd a-been born as speedy pickerel and not people!" I rest my case, and I have spoken.

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

3. If the GPS readings agree with the Raymarine readings, you've calibrated the Raymarines and the data they produce should be acceptable in court.

Silver Duck

That's Judge Silver Duck, presiding?

[Phantom]

Reported on WCVB Television (Chan 5) in the Boston area last nite was a small piece about the Speed Limits on Winni -- Although they were not detailed in their reporting as to where the speed limits were, they reported that MP was out currently taking "test data" and that the Speed Limit would go into effect August 1st !!!!!!

Did they misreport the start date???? I thought it went into effect June 1 !

[B R]

Originally Posted by jrc

So if they are really doing a test this summer, what constitutes a successful test? If no boats are observed exceeeding the limit, is that a success or failure? If no boats are ticketed is that a success? If 100 boats are ticketed? A thousand?

If the judge throws out some or all of the tickets because the rule is somehow not proper? Or the areas are not marked well enough? Or radar isn't reliable enough? Are these successes or failures?

It's obvious that these successes or failures can be spun.

Imagine this line of thinking: The MP says that they couldn't issue many tickets because it was too hard to determine if the offending boat was in the speed zone or not. Conlusion: we must enlarge the the speed zone to the entire lake.

Imagine this: The MP says we didn't issue any tickets because we never observed a boat exceeding the speed limit. Conclusion: speed limits are effective because they kept the speeding boats off the lake. Make speed limits lakewide and permanent.

Or imagine the opposite facts: The MP says we issued 100 tickets to boats we observed breaking the speed limit. Conclusion: speed limits are effective but not strong enough. Make speed limits lakewide and permanent.

Or imagine this: we've been using 80 man hours a week and we're writing one or two tickets. This is a colossal waist of time and manpower.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Silver Duck

Actually, it would be fairly straight forward to calibrate the Raymarines:
1. Turn a few handheld GPSs into "transfer standards" by comparing their readings (on land) to radar guns which have been shown to be accurate and whose readings are acceptable in court.
2. Put those GPSs aboard boats and make repetitive test runs past the Raymarines at a range of speeds, while documenting both the GPS readings and the Raymarine readings. (I'd do this using multiple GPS-carrying boats travelling in multiple directions concurrrently.)
3. If the GPS readings agree with the Raymarine readings, you've calibrated the Raymarines and the data they produce should be acceptable in court.

Silver Duck

It would have to be a range of speed and ranges as the radars have to determine distance travelled from at least 2 measurements of distance (and then time). To determine distance travelled it'll need to calculate the geometry and that gives you 2* main sources of error, the range error and the angle error. I don't know what Raymarine units the MP has but quickie look at the Raymarine site listed these as 70' or 1.5% of the range setting and 1 degree, respectively, for these. You could calbrate them with GPS but the next question asked would be how long this calibration is good for. Can you go for a year between cals ? A week ? A day ? The best bet would be to have Raymarine specify the accuracy and cal period and live with that. For all I know the units the MP have may be good enough.


*Of course this assumes the MP boat doesn't move in any way. Which of course it will for any "long" observation time. So the MP's would then have to have a GPS and compass reading fed into the calculations. Certainly to prove these factors weren't a factor, they'll need to record them to show they didn't change appreciably during the observation time.

[Silver Duck]

Mee & Mac

Point taken about the range of distances! Actually, if I were doing this at work, I'd probably set up an exploratory test with a 10 distance point by 10 speed point matrix to see what the unit was capable of, then narrrow at least the speed range down to something like 40 to 65 mph for the actual operational qualification testing. You're also correct about establishing a calibration interval; that would need to be done experimentally, too.

I do think that, in the long run, qualifying the Raymarines (if possible) would be a more practical alternative than hand held radar guns that need to be pointed at a specific boat. That way, the MP could monitor everything in the area simultaneously.

I, too, suspect that the Raymarine setups are good enough to do the job off the shelf, but for use in court that would need to be proven. I also suspect that the MP is not going to be interested in 46 mph vs 45, but will be looking for more like 50 or so as a minimum.

Gavia Immer

It would convince me if I were the Judge, but then, I set up testing programs for process equipment for a living! Actually, I would hope that it would be necessary only to convince one court-appointed expert rather than each judge; I seriously doubt that most judges have much understanding of how radar works but they accept radar gun data anyway!.

Silver Duck

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by Cal

Wonder if radar detectors work in boats? This could be a good test .

Would you be able to hear them?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

Would you be able to hear them?

I would. Mines a GFBQ Formula

[Fun4us]

Where are these speed limit areas? Have you seen the MP out there during the week or only on weekends? I was under the impresion that no law was passed and they (MP) were just doing a pilot program to check the speeds on the lake.

has anyone been ticketed yet....or stopped?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Fun4us

Where are these speed limit areas? Have you seen the MP out there during the week or only on weekends? I was under the impresion that no law was passed and they (MP) were just doing a pilot program to check the speeds on the lake.

has anyone been ticketed yet....or stopped?

It doesn't start until August 1, 2007

Basic area are west of Bear and Rattlesnake islands. Someone posted a map here.

[Fun4us]

I still didnt think it was aproved. I thought the vote was 50 50

[Paugus Bay Resident]

This is a pilot program. The House voted to retain the bill, holding it over to the next session. The pilot program was offered as an alternative by (ex) Commissioner Flynn (Winnipesaukee only)

[Irrigation Guy]

I thought August 1 was a critical date for the speed limit thing. Also wonder if its been signed into law at this point as I haven't seen much about it lately.

[Skip]

....upcoming enforcement of speed limit test zones on Winni are delayed again until mid August at the earliest.

Read the STORY in today's on-line edition of the Union Leader.

[NHskier]

There is a comparable article in today's Concord Monitor:

http://concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs....TORY/707290351

NHskier

[ITD]

From the Concord Monitor Article

"The data that we're collecting is not giving us a sense that there's a lot of high-speed boat traffic," he said. (Marine Patrol Director David Barrett)

From the Citizen Article http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070730/CITIZEN_01/107300226/-1/CITIZEN

"One thing he (Barrett) is confident in is that many unexperienced boaters who are viewing vessels from shore, are likely believing boats are going faster than they are."

This whole issue is a sham, we are going to end up with a law that isn't necessary. Stop this madness legislators.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by ITD

From the Concord Monitor Article

"The data that we're collecting is not giving us a sense that there's a lot of high-speed boat traffic," he said. (Marine Patrol Director David Barrett)

From the Citizen Article http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070730/CITIZEN_01/107300226/-1/CITIZEN

"One thing he (Barrett) is confident in is that many unexperienced boaters who are viewing vessels from shore, are likely believing boats are going faster than they are."

This whole issue is a sham, we are going to end up with a law that isn't necessary. Stop this madness legislators.

It was never about speed, it has always been about getting rid of specific boats. Hopefully, the MP will collect data in other parts of the lake as well and use it to justify that there's never been a need for a limit.

My favorite quote from the article:

"Richard Bouley, a Concord lobbyist and spokesman for Winnipesaukee Families for Boat Safety, one of the primary groups supporting a speed limit for boats, said the Legislature should take action on the bill this year, with or without complete data from the pilot program.

"I think the facts are already before the public," said Bouley, who plans to attend the hearing before the rules committee. "I think the Legislature's the one that needs to decide. There's no one else but them." "

Ummm, what facts Mr. Bouley? I'd LOVE to see some speed facts. So far, all I've seen from WinnFABs are opinions...

[Resident 2B]

http://concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs....TORY/707290351


Based upon the Concord Monitor on-line report from 2 days ago linked above, the MP Officer taking the speed readings was unable to leave his position to cite a boater that was breaking the 150' law, because once on position to take speed readings he had to remain on position.

Although I favor the collection of speed data, I wonder how inefficiently the MP $$$ are being used if a MP Officer taking speed readings cannot enforce any other laws.

The biggest issue we have on the lake is the lack of attention to the existing 150' rule and here a violation happens right in front of a MP Officer who is on duty, but he cannot stop the offender because he is taking speed readings.

If the speed limit law gets passed, how many other times will boaters violating the 150' rule right in front of an MP Officer get away with breaking the law while the MP Officer concentrates on finding the very few boaters exceeding the speed limit?

I feel the MP needs to enforce the existing 150' law more strongly in the best interest of safety for all who boat on the lake. Those of us who boat on the lake realize this is the biggest safety exposure.

R2B

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

http://concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs....TORY/707290351


Based upon the Concord Monitor on-line report from 2 days ago linked above, the MP Officer taking the speed readings was unable to leave his position to cite a boater that was breaking the 150' law, because once on position to take speed readings he had to remain on position.

Although I favor the collection of speed data, I wonder how inefficiently the MP $$$ are being used if a MP Officer taking speed readings cannot enforce any other laws.

The biggest issue we have on the lake is the lack of attention to the existing 150' rule and here a violation happens right in front of a MP Officer who is on duty, but he cannot stop the offender because he is taking speed readings.

If the speed limit law gets passed, how many other times will boaters violating the 150' rule right in front of an MP Officer get away with breaking the law while the MP Officer concentrates on finding the very few boaters exceeding the speed limit?

I feel the MP needs to enforce the existing 150' law more strongly in the best interest of safety for all who boat on the lake. Those of us who boat on the lake realize this is the biggest safety exposure.

R2B

R2B, You can thank Winnfabs for creating this situation, and as you put it, the law they are trying to push will create more work on an already taxed MP. Therefore they won't be able to handle the real issues while out taking radar readings. Call your legislator, tell them to vote NO on HB 847!!!

[Skip]

From today's online edition of the Citizen, additional information and new proposals regarding the Winni & possible statewide speed limits.

Very interesting reading....

The full story can be read HERE!

[chmeeee]

Originally Posted by Dave R

"Richard Bouley, a Concord lobbyist and spokesman for Winnipesaukee Families for Boat Safety, one of the primary groups supporting a speed limit for boats, said the Legislature should take action on the bill this year, with or without complete data from the pilot program.

Wouldn't want to let the facts get in the way or anything...

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Wouldn't want to let the facts get in the way or anything

Facts only cloud the (emotional) issue Didn't know WinnFabs had a lobbyist.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

Facts only cloud the (emotional) issue Didn't know WinnFabs had a lobbyist.

Another speed related boating death on the lake again this summer is all the facts I need.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Islander

Another speed related boating death on the lake again this summer is all the facts I need.

Which one would that be?

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Islander

Another speed related boating death on the lake again this summer is all the facts I need.

I have to admit I haven't been tracking such things this year but what speed related death did we have this year ? When was the other one ?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

This is a pilot program. The House voted to retain the bill, holding it over to the next session. The pilot program was offered as an alternative by (ex) Commissioner Flynn (Winnipesaukee only)

Let's see...
Director Barrett first stated that he couldn't enforce a speed limit.
Then, under pressure, he said he would.
Then, under pressure, he embraces (ex) Commissioner Flynn's last-minute reprieve involving just two zones of questionable location. (And announces their locations!)
Then he says "It's complicated".
Then he says "We can't do it", "hardly anybody's speeding anyway", and dilutes enforcement (and the study) by conducting tests in some unauthorized "six other areas".
Now it's back to "it's complicated".

Although enforcement appears more sweeping among a shrinking boating population, this particular Director doesn't have any fire left.

[Woodsy]

Islander...

What speed related death has occurred in NH this year? Please elaborate as I have no knowledge of this event.

APS...

I really think you see some sort of conspiracy around every corner....

I would think you would be happy with the MP this season. The administrative rule that WINNFABS petitioned for (and was the basis for the speed limit test) requires legislative action in Concord. WINNFABS should have known that nothing moves too quickly in Concord in the summer. The delay is in Concord, not the MP. In fact I applaud Director Barrett for being very proactive!! Even though they were not required to do anything until the administrative rule has passed, they set up daily "radar traps" in 6 different parts of the lake to get a somewhat accurate measure of boat speed and I would assume density. At least he will have something to report back to the Transportation Committee in September.

I have no doubt, that if the Legislature were to pass a speed limit, Director Barrett would do his best to enforce it. As of right now it is still an unfunded mandate. There is a cost associated with this bill, in training, equipment, and administrative court costs.

I think MP are doing a great job with the resources they have! They have been very aggressive this year targeting rules infractions, especially with their "unmarked" PWC's...

Woodsy

[ITD]

I'm telling ya, they're like ghouls, waiting for someone to die so they can get their way, frankly it's disturbing, they make up facts where there are none to support their arguements, then declare themselves right and that their made up facts are beyond reproach. The scary part is that they believe the things they make up. When studies show no problem they impugn the messenger.

Follow closely legislators.............

[SIKSUKR]

Originally Posted by Islander

Another speed related boating death on the lake again this summer is all the facts I need.

Still waiting to hear what the speed related death on the lake this year was.

[SIKSUKR]

Love them "facts"

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Islander

Another speed related boating death on the lake again this summer is all the facts I need.

I'm having a hard time finding this fact. Where's the fact?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

"...I would think you would be happy with the MP this season...'

They are absolutely more prominent than last year.

Originally Posted by Woodsy

"...They have been very aggressive this year targeting rules infractions, especially with their "unmarked" PWC's..."

None has passed by me, but I wish them luck. That is a pro-active move, but PWCs have been around for many years. It's long overdue.

Originally Posted by Woodsy

"...I think MP are doing a great job with the resources they have!

Tuftonboro Fire Department got a free PWC from the dealer!

Where was the NHMP on that?

(Though the better question would be, "Where was the dealer"?)

Originally Posted by Woodsy

"...I have no doubt, that if the Legislature were to pass a speed limit, Director Barrett would do his best to enforce it..."

Remember the politico who stated, "I voted for it before I voted against it"?

After three years of gaffes, no one can take Director Barrett at his word—either.

BTW: It's been almost exactly five years since my letter was published titled "Winnipesaukee is Anarchy". (August 8th) Three days later, my perception of anarchy became reality.

Ghoulish? Not what I saw. I saw anarchy.

Are things improving? It doesn't appear so.

There are fewer boats to hit, and the general population appear to be averaging faster speeds and longer, heavier boats. Saturday's awful wind-and-wakes combination had me off to rescue another boater ½-mile away; fortunately, a more suitable boat arrived first and was able to take the passengers.

While Winnipesaukee waits with dread the next terrible headline, those having the most dread have only themselves to blame.

[Airwaves]

APS wrote:

BTW: It's been almost exactly five years since my letter was published titled "Winnipesaukee is Anarchy". (August 8th) Three days later, my perception of anarchy became reality.

Ghoulish? Not what I saw. I saw anarchy.

Are things improving? It doesn't appear so.

I guess your idea of things not improving and mine are different. No fatal accidents on Lake Winnipesaukee involving a boat collision in years. This is anarchy?

There are fewer boats to hit, and the general population appear to be averaging faster speeds and longer, heavier boats.

Oh, so our aim is diminishing with age? Is that what you're trying to say?

Saturday's awful wind-and-wakes combination had me off to rescue another boater ½-mile away;

Yep, wind and wakes...oh wait, wind makes waves, boats make wakes...hmmm Guess it's time to outlaw weather on the big lake as well.

fortunately, a more suitable boat arrived first and was able to take the passengers

So are you saying you went out on the water ill equiped to handle the situation, and could very well have become a statistic yourself that would have required putting life and limb of the MP in danger?

APS you are trying to fear monger, and that tells me that even you have come to the conclusion that there is no evidence to support your claims of "anarchy" on the lake that require a solution in search of a problem.