45/25 Speed Limit already working!

[Bear Lover]

The head of the Marine Patrol from lake George claims boats are obeying the speed limit, few tickets are required, tourism is great and the lake is a safer place to boat.

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...073/-1/CITIZEN

"... those overseeing safety on New York's Lake George say that their law is an effective and necessary tool in preventing unsafe boating."

The head of the NH Marine Patrol has said that he will enforce HB162 if passed.

The USCG claims speed is the #4 contributing factor in boating accidents

The USCGA says "Speed Kills"

Can NHRBA give us an example where a boating speed limit has decreased safety?

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by Bear Lover

Can NHRBA give us an example where a boating speed limit has decreased safety?

Certainly not, but I do have to admit that I'd be even more concerned about my safety if noise bill HB1624 passes and safety bill HB162 does not. Although I repeat that I do support noise bill HB1624 and hope it passes, I worry about those 100MPH boats coming at me without the noise to warn me to get out of the way. Noise bill HB1624 is a great idea as long as it joins with safety bill HB162 as the first steps in an overall strategy to repair the problems on our lakes, and is not put forth as some sort of a substitute. A noise limit is no substitute for safety.
By the way, how/why did HB1624 get ahead of HB162's final vote on the House calendar?

[Seaplane Pilot]

Banning all boating will also increase safety, but that doesn't make it right or realistic.

If Lake George is such a safe, wonderful place (as many of you have stated and seem to insist on comparing to Winni), why don't you just go there and leave Winnipesaukee to us wild and crazy people. Seems we'd all be a lot happier.

[overlook]

How many boating deaths in NH in 2005?

How many in Lake George in 2005?

USCG adopts Reasonal and prudent to prevailing conditions.


Lake winnipasakee is much safter than Lake George right now. How would you like for someone to pass along side at 45mph within 15'?

[fatlazyless]

Well, in all consideration, I can understand how owners who have spent big bucks on their high horsepower, high-speed boats want be able to continue to use them to go fast. Like, that was probably one big reason why they spent the big money on them in the first place.......the adrenaline rush of speed.

So, what do you think about this? Starting at the Black Point - Little Mark Island area at the north end of Alton Bay and heading south to the village of Alton Bay, could Alton Bay become the designated 'no-speed limit' and 'go-fasts are very welcome' area for the entire lake?

Consider this; Representative Whalley (R) Alton recently said that people in the shore line homes couldn't care less what the boats do out on the water as long as they do not make too much noise or interrupt their tv reception. Ok, Rep Whalley, would you welcome this Alton Bay go-fast zone suggestion?

[Bear Lover]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Banning all boating will also increase safety, but that doesn't make it right or realistic.

If Lake George is such a safe, wonderful place (as many of you have stated and seem to insist on comparing to Winni), why don't you just go there and leave Winnipesaukee to us wild and crazy people. Seems we'd all be a lot happier.

You write "Banning all boats will also increase safety.." The "also" means you agree that a speed limit will increase safety. That is exactly the point we are trying to make.

And I agree with you, banning all boats is not right or realistic. A speed limit is.

I will remind you that the majority is in favor of speed limits by a large margin. However we don't want you to leave the lake, we just want you to slow down a little to make the lake safer for all.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

Lake George is such a safe, wonderful place

There is so much traffic to that Citizen link (http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...073/-1/CITIZEN) that I'm not sure everyone is able to view it. Please be patient. The Citizen suggests that we might need to wait until later in the evening when traffic to it is slower.

[Bear Lover]

Originally Posted by overlook

How many boating deaths in NH in 2005?

How many in Lake George in 2005?

We are all aware that there was a horrible accident on Lake George last summer that killed 20 senior citizens.

Are you implying that these deaths were do to Lake George's speed limit?

[Resident 2B]

I think the point is that there is much more to the equation than speed.

It is a shame these people died. No one should die while enjoying any lake or body of water. May they rest in peace.

Common sense saves lives, regardless of the speed.

[overlook]

Originally Posted by Bear Lover

We are all aware that there was a horrible accident on Lake George last summer that killed 20 senior citizens.

Are you implying that these deaths were do to Lake George's speed limit?

There is no safe passage law for moving boats/ maybe this is why.

Overcrowded boat/ maybe this is why.

inattention of the operator/ maybe.
I have not seen the report, only conjecture.

My piont is I FEEL safer in a small craft putting along in NH than on lake George.
Never the less it will still take some idiot breaking a law to cause me harm.

[Bear Lover]

I notice that the opposition doesn't have much to say about the article itself.

The words of Lt. Schneider disprove almost every claim by the opposition.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by overlook

Never the less it will still take some idiot breaking a law to cause me harm.

And if there is no MP there now to witness this act , what makes you think there will be one to slow that idiot down?

But the good news is , if you are , by some unfortunate chance killed , as well as other charges , Captain Bonehead can be charged with speeding.

Boy , that sure gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling .

[Woodsy]

Those poor souls on Lake George have absolutly nothing to do with this debate. It was a horrible, horrible tragedy.

That being said, I really don't think Lt. Schnieder's words prove or disprove anything. They only write 5-6 speeding tickets per year. Thats a complete joke. I was led to believe by a close friend of mine on who lives on Lake George that 4 of those tickets were written to PWC's speeding within 500' of shoreline. (On Lake George you cannot operate a PWC at anything other than headway speed within 500' of shore, so any PWC going over headway speed within 500' of the shoreline would be considered "Speeding") It would be really interested to see who/what the tickets were actually written for.

I have personally witnessed a 160MPH high speed pass by a boat on Lake George. Right in front of the Lake George MP. No ticket was written....

This is New Hampshire, not not New York. What works in NY may not necessarily work in NH. We on Lake Winnipesaukee have a 150' safe passage rule. NY does not.

I don't agree with an arbitrary limit. I think reasonable & proper for the conditions will work just fine.

Woodsy

[Aubrey]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Those poor souls on Lake George have absolutly nothing to do with this debate. It was a horrible, horrible tragedy.

That being said, I really don't think Lt. Schnieder's words prove or disprove anything. They only write 5-6 speeding tickets per year. Thats a complete joke. I was led to believe by a close friend of mine on who lives on Lake George that 4 of those tickets were written to PWC's speeding within 500' of shoreline. (On Lake George you cannot operate a PWC at anything other than headway speed within 500' of shore, so any PWC going over headway speed within 500' of the shoreline would be considered "Speeding") It would be really interested to see who/what the tickets were actually written for.

I have personally witnessed a 160MPH high speed pass by a boat on Lake George. Right in front of the Lake George MP. No ticket was written....

This is New Hampshire, not not New York. What works in NY may not necessarily work in NH. We on Lake Winnipesaukee have a 150' safe passage rule. NY does not.

I don't agree with an arbitrary limit. I think reasonable & proper for the conditions will work just fine.

Woodsy

I think 160 mph is WAY to fast for our lakes!

I don't know any of the lake George Marine Patrol, but I know a few of the Winni Marine Patrol, and I don't think they will allow a boat to go 160 mph in a 45 mph zone with a ticket.

Besides, how do you know the boat was going 160 mph, were you in it?

Anyway your entire "boats will go fast anyway" argument does not argue against a speed limit. Obviously most boats will slow down if a speed limit is enacted. The few scoff laws that will still go 160 mph will end up facing a judge sooner or later.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by overlook

Lake winnipasakee is much safter than Lake George right now. How would you like for someone to pass along side at 45mph within 15'?

I would like to see the 150' rule reduced for boats that are both moving. I couldn't care less if someone passes within 150 feet of me if we are both at speed, as long as they do so without putting me at risk. Maybe we could get HB162 ammended to allow this, just like Lake George. Now I think It's worth writing my reps and state senator.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Those poor souls on Lake George have absolutly nothing to do with this debate. It was a horrible, horrible tragedy.
{snip}
This is New Hampshire, not not New York. What works in NY may not necessarily work in NH. We on Lake Winnipesaukee have a 150' safe passage rule. NY does not.

I don't agree with an arbitrary limit. I think reasonable & proper for the conditions will work just fine.

Woodsy

First let me also say the tour boat tradgey has nothing to do with speed limits; it might have a lot of applicability in other debates. Second I have no idea of how to objectively prove or disprove whether LG's speed limit is working or not. What defines working ? Lastly let remember the LG is not Winni. It's smaller and more crowded. Last annual boat count on an Aug day tallied 10,517 vessels on the lake. Tossing out sailboats, canoes, PWCs, etc you get 6624 boats.

[Woodsy]

Aubrey...

I was not in the boat. The guy that owns that perticular boat is a very respected businessman in Lake George. He was the one who stated to me (and others) that his hi-speed pass was at approximately 160MPH. I am sure the MP up there in lake George know who he is. There are maybe 10 boats in the whole country that can run that fast....

I personally have no desire to go 160MPH on the water. However I do support the "Reasonable & Prudent" minority amendment as I feel 45 MPH is an arbitrary number and too slow.

I think the better soulution would be reasonable & prudent, and find some way to fund a better MP presence on Lake Winnipesaukee. More MP's usually denotes less boneheads.

Woodsy

[Ski Man]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

I think 160 mph is WAY to fast for our lakes!

Aubrey,
Unfortunately, Our MP director does not agree, and that has just fed the flames. Last January, he was asked point blank by one if the RR&D committee members "Surely you must feel that some limit is appropriate. Isn't there some speed that you agree is too high for that lake (referring to Winnipesaukee)? How about 200 miles an hour?"
His response; "No. Speed and safety have no proven relationship in a marine environment. There is no speed so high that it would not be perfectly safe on Lake Winnipesaukee under the right conditons. Its a big lake."
At the moment this exchange was read to me, I understood how he'd earned the nickname "Director of Marine Danger".

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Ski Man

Aubrey,
Unfortunately, Our MP director does not agree, and that has just fed the flames. Last January, he was asked point blank by one if the RR&D committee members "Surely you must feel that some limit is appropriate. Isn't there some speed that you agree is too high for that lake (referring to Winnipesaukee)? How about 200 miles an hour?"
His response; "No. Speed and safety have no proven relationship in a marine environment. There is no speed so high that it would not be perfectly safe on Lake Winnipesaukee under the right conditons. Its a big lake."
At the moment this exchange was read to me, I understood how he'd earned the nickname "Director of Marine Danger".

Do you really think it is appropriate to besmirch this man? He has been serving the state for many years. He lives in the region. He has been involved in boating safety for a long time. But you think calling him names is the best way to refute his statements?

As to his statement, do you think it would be any more dangerous to travel down the broards at 160 mph today or 45 mph? I mean today 1/11/06, there is not a boat on the lake.

[Orion]

Originally Posted by jrc

As to his statement, do you think it would be any more dangerous to travel down the broards at 160 mph today or 45 mph? I mean today 1/11/06, there is not a boat on the lake.

With the random ice floes, I think that would be a VERY dangerous stunt today 1/11/06.

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Orion

With the random ice floes, I think that would be a VERY dangerous stunt today 1/11/06.

I did check the webcams before I posted and there was no ice on the broads. And even if there was ice, only the boater would be in danger. We have a long tradition in NH of not stopping people from doing dangerous things when they only cause danger to themselves. That's why we have no helmet law, and no seat belt law.

[Ski Man]

Originally Posted by jrc

Do you really think it is appropriate to besmirch this man?

He is a public official doing a very bad job. He, more than anyone else, is not above criticism. It is our right and our duty to besmirch him. The very fact that he sat there and said to the committee last winter "I'm aware of no problems on Lake Winnipesaukee", then we had about three thousand people from both sides of the HB162 debate come forth and testify about an infinite array of problems that they all face every day, is a perfect summary of his job performance. And if he is that far out of touch with what is going on on the lake his desk faces, Imagine how out of touch he is with other lakes around the state.

Originally Posted by jrc

He has been serving the state for many years.

He has been serving a very small group for many years. Look carefully at his record. Search news archives and go to Glendale and look through his own files at his participation against every safety petition (except the NWZ petition this summer in front of Bourgeious house). I wonder if he doesn't call the MTA every time a bill or petition comes up to see how they want him to vote on it. He has not been serving me.

Originally Posted by jrc

He has been involved in boating safety for a long time.

So has the MTA, but while it might be fine for them, fighting boating safety is the wrong way for a safety official to be involved in it.

Originally Posted by jrc

do you think it would be any more dangerous to travel down the broards at 160 mph today or 45 mph? I mean today 1/11/06, there is not a boat on the lake.

Originally Posted by jrc

I did check the webcams before I posted and there was no ice on the broads. And even if there was ice, only the boater would be in danger. We have a long tradition in NH of not stopping people from doing dangerous things when they only cause danger to themselves. That's why we have no helmet law, and no seat belt law.

So is it your position that we should allow unlimited speeding when traffic is down to a certain level? Is that at all practical? Who decides when it is light enough? When it is time to speed? Do you call Glendale and say "there are only three boats in Alton Bay right now. Is it ok for me to go 100MPH there?" Do we station patrol boats around the lake with green flags that they hold up when the traffic is light enough for speeding? How about this instead; we write a bill with a set speed limit that applies throughout the day (45) and another throughout the night (25), so everyone knows the rules, then we let racing clubs apply for permits to have racing events under MP supervision? Lets call this bill HB162.

[overlook]

Ski man,

To make an statement like that, you must have proof to back it up.

His statements do not side with any particular group, and I was involved in the discussion for the NWZ. The proposal was based on complaints, opinions and facts. It was not proposed for any one persons interest.

Boat safe, Boat smart.

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Ski Man

He is a public official doing a very bad job...

If that's your opinion, fine, criticize, complain and vote, but you really don't have to call him names. I did Google him, and did not find anything damning. I don't know what an MTA is.

Originally Posted by Ski Man

So is it your position that we should allow unlimited speeding when traffic is down to a certain level? ....

Yes, it's called "reasonable and prudent". You may have read about it.

You do know that even should the more restrictive HB-162 pass, that boaters will have to use their judgement to determine their maximum safe speeds. Even with a state-wide speed limit of 45 mph, boaters will often not be able to go 45 mph because it will not be reasonable or prudent to do so. They won't have to call the MP to figure it out, they will just use their judgement. And if they're judgement is wrong, they'll will be fined. Do you have a better solution?