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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-02-2015, 08:13 AM   #1
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Angry Homeowner: Keep 150 ft away from my dock!

Yesterday while on a friends boat we found a nice quiet (no wakes) spot to anchor. This area was deep into the dog leg of Winter Harbor north to north east of the entrance to The Basin. We were not in a 'no rafting zone'.

As we were setting our anchor a woman comes running down her dock waving her arms yelling 150 feet! 150 feet!

Note we came in at idle, headway only speed as we just came through a field of other boats at anchor.

I just smiled and told the boat owner to just say thank you. I guess they decided that we were not within their zone and stopped waving us off.

Another boat then came in closer to them and set their anchor. This time a man jumped into the water and swam up to the boat to tell them to move because they can't be anchored within 150 ft of their dock!

Wow, really?!?

Edited to add a photo. You can see the home owner in the water. He claims his dock is 75 feet long, so he knows when someone is within 150 feet by double his dock length.

I stood on the bow and after that boat moved I let them know that they were well within their rights to anchor within 150 ft because there is no law that says they can't be so close.

Note that all boaters were being quiet and courteous. There was no loud music nor voices involved.

People need to know that the 150 ft rule is headway speed only, it doesn't mean you have to anchor any certain distance away from a dock. If you like, you can anchor within an inch of someone's dock. Not that I would do this, but you could legally do it if you wanted to prove a point! Just always be courteous and polite.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com

Last edited by Rich; 08-02-2015 at 09:18 PM.
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 08:29 AM   #2
Kamper
Senior Member
 
Kamper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Thornton's Ferry
Posts: 1,195
Thanks: 65
Thanked 141 Times in 105 Posts
Default

You got it right. 150 feet of shore, docks, floats, swim lines, bridges and bathers (and a few more things) are just 'No-Wake' zones.

Too bad you didn't record those folks. I bet it would be humorous.
Kamper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 08:34 AM   #3
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

I tried to video them but they were too far away from me at the time to hear them and be picked up by my phone.

I did snap a photo with the owner swimming back to his dock after confronting the second boat. I'll try to post the picture when I get the time.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 08:36 AM   #4
sky's
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 166
Thanks: 34
Thanked 28 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamper View Post
You got it right. 150 feet of shore, docks, floats, swim lines, bridges and bathers (and a few more things) are just 'No-Wake' zones.

Too bad you didn't record those folks. I bet it would be humorous.
as beautiful as Winni is its been tainted over the years with actions like this. give me a house with a view any day.
sky's is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 08:49 AM   #5
jrc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hollis/Gilford
Posts: 2,688
Thanks: 33
Thanked 437 Times in 247 Posts
Default

As long as you are not in a no rafting zone, in general, you can anchor anywhere you want. You cannot obstruct navigation, so give them room to get to their dock, and obviously don't cross a swim line.

But just because you can doesn't mean you should. If boaters antagonize shore front owners, especially repeatedly in the same area, they will petition for a no rafting zone and they may win.
jrc is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to jrc For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (08-06-2015), garysanfran (08-02-2015), ITD (08-02-2015), Lakegeezer (08-02-2015), Mr Cooke's Crew (08-03-2015)
Sponsored Links
Old 08-02-2015, 09:45 AM   #6
garysanfran
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Francisco/Meredith
Posts: 749
Thanks: 219
Thanked 273 Times in 126 Posts
Default Why incite the harassement?

It's a big lake. Do you have to anchor in a place that causes problems for others?

It may be legal, but so is my freedom of speech, and your children are going to learn a new vocabulary of very short four letter words. Find another place.
__________________
Gary
~~~~_/) ~~~
~~~~~~~~
garysanfran is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to garysanfran For This Useful Post:
Mr Cooke's Crew (08-03-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 10:28 AM   #7
jetlag100
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Revere, Massachusetts and Moultonborough, N.H.
Posts: 306
Thanks: 228
Thanked 76 Times in 48 Posts
Default

This makes me laugh...not that people were anchored off our dock or anything but try living in the Hole in the Wall...people would be 2 ft off our dock just passing through..sometimes we'd hand them a beer! Live on folks!
jetlag100 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jetlag100 For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (08-06-2015), markt111 (08-13-2015), Misha888 (08-03-2015), Winopt (08-02-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 11:01 AM   #8
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

It is already a no rafting zone.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to tis For This Useful Post:
harbor guy (12-20-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 11:21 AM   #9
Moccasin
Member
 
Moccasin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 28
Thanks: 18
Thanked 8 Times in 3 Posts
Default Might be other reasons...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrc View Post
As long as you are not in a no rafting zone, in general, you can anchor anywhere you want. You cannot obstruct navigation, so give them room to get to their dock, and obviously don't cross a swim line.

But just because you can doesn't mean you should. If boaters antagonize shore front owners, especially repeatedly in the same area, they will petition for a no rafting zone and they may win.
Periodically boaters drop anchor off our shoreline, a little too close. With a dock, young swimmers, a handy float near our partially submerged water line that serves as our water supply (not drinking obviously)- for those reasons, sometimes we have to get boaters' attention, and request they anchor a little farther off. All I ask is visitors scope out the area before settling in!

We get fishers early every morning under our dining and sleeping areas. Ice houses in front of our property in winter. Shell casings among our blueberry bushes.

I firmly believe the lake belongs to everyone, where ever the water touches. A little bit of consideration sharing this heavenly space is all that's needed.

Enjoy your time at the lake!

- Long Time visitor / resident
Moccasin is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Moccasin For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (08-06-2015), KrotzNH (07-23-2016), Lakegeezer (08-02-2015), Mr Cooke's Crew (08-03-2015), SAMIAM (08-03-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 01:45 PM   #10
ITD
Senior Member
 
ITD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts and Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,290
Thanks: 335
Thanked 419 Times in 243 Posts
Default

Hmmmmm, maybe the lady is right.


PART Saf-C 407 RAFTING RULES

Saf-C 407.01 Rafting Rules.

(a) In addition to and in conjunction with the requirements of RSA 270:44, no person, except as otherwise provided herein, shall, in a prohibited location or at a prohibited time:

(1) Form or allow a boat which he or she is operating or in charge of to be a member of a raft consisting of 3 or more boats;

(2) Form or allow the boat which he or she is operating or in charge of to be a member of a raft if any part of such raft is:

a. Less than 150 feet from shore;

b. Less than 50 feet from any other raft; or

c. Less than 50 feet from any occupied single boat which is stationary upon the waters of the same lake or pond; and

(3) Anchor a single boat and cause it to remain stationary upon the waters of a lake or pond, other than momentarily, if any part of such boat is:

a. Less than 150 feet from shore;

b. Less than 50 feet away from any raft; or

c. Less than 25 feet away from any other single boat which is stationary upon the waters of such lake or pond.

Source. #2573, eff 12-30-83; ss by #3010, eff 5-2-85; ss by #4070, eff 06-30-86; ss by #4562, eff 1-3-89; amd by #5862, eff 7-1-94; amd by #5936, INTERIM, eff 1-3-95, EXPIRES, 5-3-95; ss by #6005, eff 3-24-95, EXPIRED: 3-24-03

New. #7904, INTERIM, eff 6-24-03, EXPIRED: 12-21-03

New. #8107, EMERGENCY, eff 6-22-04, EXPIRES: 12-19-04; ss by #8172, eff 9-21-04; ss by #10293, eff 3-20-13
ITD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 02:42 PM   #11
Newbiesaukee
Senior Member
 
Newbiesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Coral Gables, winter; Long Island, summer
Posts: 940
Thanks: 498
Thanked 290 Times in 153 Posts
Default

I am not questioning, just asking. The single boat anchorage applies in a no rafting zone only....is this correct?
__________________


"You're only young once, but you can be immature forever."
Newbiesaukee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 03:23 PM   #12
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

I didn't think anyone was trying to antagonize anyone, at least none of the boaters were. It was a small cove, and no one was trying to get close on purpose. It just was the geometry of the area.

No one was trying to raft. There were other boats in the area too. My chart doesn't show this as a no rafting zone (we did check it).

I'm also not promoting starting problems with the land owners. Did you you see my ?

If the landowner said he had pipes in the water, or there were kids in the water it would have been a different story. But the landowner was the rude antagonist end of this story. There was nothing pleasant about the way they handled this. This was what surprised me, it was the first time I witnessed this sort of behavior first hand on the lake.

I try to be polite and courteous to everyone.

John, good to see you here again! Been on the water lately?
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 04:58 PM   #13
ITD
Senior Member
 
ITD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts and Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,290
Thanks: 335
Thanked 419 Times in 243 Posts
Default

Looks like a no rafting zone...

https://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/...estricted.html

7) Winter Harbor from the southern boundary of the Tuftonboro tax map 63, lot No. 14 to the southern boundary of tax map 51, lot No. 20.
ITD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 04:59 PM   #14
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

You may not see it as a no rafting area but it is.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 05:06 PM   #15
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

Sorry if I missed it, but I didn't see where the OP mentioned boats rafting? Sounds like they were doing the right thing (not loud or obnoxious), and they just came across an aggressive homeowner.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to thinkxingu For This Useful Post:
dave603 (08-02-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 05:20 PM   #16
JTA
Senior Member
 
JTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Hebron, CT
Posts: 195
Thanks: 21
Thanked 16 Times in 14 Posts
Default

OK, so the boats are within their rights but why anchor basically in someone's yard (even though legal)? There are many spots to anchor and swim that don't come in front of someone's waterfront property. Would I park my car in the street in front of someone's house and then have a tail gate party? I live near a spot where a few boats anchor and swim and stay far enough out from land to be courteous.
JTA is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JTA For This Useful Post:
Mr Cooke's Crew (08-03-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 06:05 PM   #17
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,774
Thanks: 463
Thanked 502 Times in 284 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JTA View Post
OK, so the boats are within their rights but why anchor basically in someone's yard (even though legal)? There are many spots to anchor and swim that don't come in front of someone's waterfront property. Would I park my car in the street in front of someone's house and then have a tail gate party? I live near a spot where a few boats anchor and swim and stay far enough out from land to be courteous.
Why buy a "yard" some place where you are going to be frustrated by people enjoying a nearby natural resource peacefully?

These things go both ways, and I agree that people shouldn't purposefully try to antagonize each other. However if you establish a trend of allowing landowners to push boaters out beyond acceptable and legal limits it will only lead to the erosion of enjoyable locations overall.
__________________
[insert witty phrase here]
brk-lnt is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to brk-lnt For This Useful Post:
dave603 (08-02-2015), HellRaZoR004 (08-02-2015), noreast (08-03-2015), thinkxingu (08-02-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 06:58 PM   #18
dave603
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Nashua/Winnisquam
Posts: 281
Thanks: 103
Thanked 96 Times in 49 Posts
Default

That is the point. The lakes, ALL of them, belong the the public...period!
Just because you decide to own lakefront, you need to remember that fact.
You don't own the lake. The State and people do.
150' rule should be known for what the law reads, not for someone who wants it to be what they want it to be. If they have dock, they should have a boat or at least know the rules of owning one

There are places on Winnisquam I anchor, and don't bother people, close to shore. Parts where the is no 150 feet, and never had a problem, and some really nice homes along the shore.

As for someone "swimming" up to me and telling to move off of what is really public domain , I'll tell him to talk to the MPs first, then I'll call them, and whatever Local cops it may be.
No sense getting into trouble with some wannabe.

I don't go near places that look like it would cause issues with land owners.
But I won't be put upon from some self important ass either.
dave603 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dave603 For This Useful Post:
gillygirl (08-02-2015), HellRaZoR004 (08-02-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 07:06 PM   #19
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,681
Thanks: 23
Thanked 360 Times in 169 Posts
Default

We all wish other people to treat us with courtesy.

However I expect, and in fact demand, that people obey the law. I am not familiar with the exact location of that No Rafting Zone. If the area in question is within that zone, then it was illegal for even a single boat to drop anchor within 150 feet of shore. The fact they were not rafting does not apply.

It would appear that the homeowners were within their rights.

It is the responsibility of every operator to both know and obey the law. That includes knowing where you may, and may not, drop your anchor.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
ApS (08-03-2015), Mr Cooke's Crew (08-03-2015), Newbiesaukee (08-02-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 07:55 PM   #20
rick35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bear Island/Merrimack
Posts: 500
Thanks: 25
Thanked 100 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave603 View Post
That is the point. The lakes, ALL of them, belong the the public...period!
The law may say that but do you really have to anchor off someone's dock? There are plenty of places around the lake where you can exercise your right.

We don't get many people anchoring off our property and if they do its usually just to jump in to cool off for a few minutes. The last time it happened one of the people on the boat knelt on the transom and wizzed into the lake. I should have gotten the bow number and called the Marine Patrol. So please understand and appreciate a property owner's perspective.

The next time you decide to anchor have some consideration and find a spot where you are away from someone's property. They don't need to see you and you don't need to see them.
rick35 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rick35 For This Useful Post:
Island-Ho (08-03-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 09:28 PM   #21
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

I added the photo to the original post.

Again, no boat was in the 'no rafting zone' (NRZ), we were not even near the NRZ which was to our south.

We were at the North end, North or North East of the entrance to 'The Basin'.

Considering that this was not a 'no rafting zone' do you really think that legally one needs to be 150 feet off of someone's dock or property?

I didn't think anyone deserved to have the homeowner to do the arm waving and shouting '150 feet, 150 feet', nor to jump into the water and swim up to the boat to tell them they had to move.

No boater was being obnoxious, nor loud, there was no offensive language, there was no loud music playing (actually, there was no music playing at all), there were no children shouting, nor dogs barking.

Mostly people were sitting in their boats enjoying the lake. Some were dangling their legs in the water, or swimming from the boats, or floating on inflatable toys from the back of the boat and staying close to the boats, and not approaching anyone's private property.

If I'm wrong, please educate me.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2015, 09:54 PM   #22
webmaster
Moderator
 
webmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,145
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 305
Thanked 2,703 Times in 631 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
I added the photo to the original post.
Sorry, I won't allow identifying information or pictures. Keep it general.
webmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to webmaster For This Useful Post:
Not to Worry (08-03-2015)
Old 08-02-2015, 10:24 PM   #23
upthesaukee
Senior Member
 
upthesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Alton Bay
Posts: 4,699
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 1,410
Thanked 1,429 Times in 774 Posts
Default Poor description...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
You may not see it as a no rafting area but it is.
I do wish they would describe this area a little better. How the heck can you tell where a tax property is on shore. Far better to say from: ie: From the black top buoy off such and such point to the entrance of the basin, on the north east side.

Sure would be a lot easier.

I must agree that it is a nice area, but it is very weedy, and can get crowded, especially on the weekends. If it gets crowded while we are there, we just move on and find a place that is less crowded. One or two boats, not bad. 8-10 or more, not so nice in front of someone's house, in my humble opinion.
__________________
I Live Here... I am always UPTHESAUKEE !!!!
upthesaukee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 06:35 AM   #24
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

Rich, you are wrong, it IS a no rafting area. I have seen MP ticket people for 3 together.

I agree with you up, it is hard to tell where an area is.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to tis For This Useful Post:
upthesaukee (08-03-2015)
Old 08-03-2015, 07:05 AM   #25
HellRaZoR004
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Litchfield/Gilford
Posts: 824
Thanks: 231
Thanked 224 Times in 131 Posts
Default You sure? Look at a map...

Lets see...where I believe Rich was does not look like a NRZ. This is based on a rough location of where he indicated the boats were (that appears to have been deleted).

References:
1.) http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2051.PDF
2.) http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2063.PDF

Approximate location:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.6.../data=!3m1!1e3
HellRaZoR004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 07:06 AM   #26
Not to Worry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 116
Thanks: 46
Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts
Default Big lake

It is a big lake so, why anchor so close to anyone's home? Life is way too short to get into a hassle especially a hassle that is 100% avoidable by finding someplace else to anchor. The guy that owns the house cannot move so cut him some slack and move away.

BTW...I was happy to see Don removed the post that showed the location of the property owner as it was totally inappropriate to do so.
Not to Worry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 07:09 AM   #27
HellRaZoR004
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Litchfield/Gilford
Posts: 824
Thanks: 231
Thanked 224 Times in 131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not to Worry View Post
It is a big lake so, why anchor so close to anyone's home? Life is way too short to get into a hassle especially a hassle that is 100% avoidable by finding someplace else to anchor. The guy that owns the house cannot move so cut him some slack and move away.

BTW...I was happy to see Don removed the post that showed the location of the property owner as it was totally inappropriate to do so.
This logic is ultimately flawed. As time progresses there will be more and more development. If every time I come up and get forced to use less and less of 'our' natural resource you are out of your mind.
HellRaZoR004 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to HellRaZoR004 For This Useful Post:
noreast (08-03-2015)
Old 08-03-2015, 07:54 AM   #28
upthesaukee
Senior Member
 
upthesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Alton Bay
Posts: 4,699
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 1,410
Thanked 1,429 Times in 774 Posts
Default Lots are on either side of Winter Harbor...

Quote:
Originally Posted by HellRaZoR004 View Post
Lets see...where I believe Rich was does not look like a NRZ. This is based on a rough location of where he indicated the boats were (that appears to have been deleted).

References:
1.) http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2051.PDF
2.) http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2063.PDF

Approximate location:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.6.../data=!3m1!1e3
One lot reference is on the rte 109 side of Winter Harbor, and the other is on the opposite shore. It would appear that the line crosses Winter Harbor, and that from that line to the Basin is a NRZ. Just how I read it, and seems to go along with what Tis has said.

As I said earlier, I sure wish that they made the delineation a lot simpler. It would make it a lot easier on all concerned.
__________________
I Live Here... I am always UPTHESAUKEE !!!!
upthesaukee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 08:56 AM   #29
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by webmaster View Post
Sorry, I won't allow identifying information or pictures. Keep it general.
OK thanks... no problem.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 08:59 AM   #30
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Rich, you are wrong, it IS a no rafting area. I have seen MP ticket people for 3 together.

I agree with you up, it is hard to tell where an area is.
If I'm wrong, then the two charts I used (the Bizer and also the Navionics up to date 'freshest data' are both wrong).

I'm happy to admit if I'm wrong. If this is a NRZ, then it is very poorly documented, even with online data that is supposed to be up to date.

Even if I'm wrong in that it was a NRZ, the home owner could be a bit more polite about it. Saying something more like "did you know this is a NRZ and you need to keep 150 feet from the shore and docks, etc?" (I like helpful people and often try to help others when I can) would have been accepted as a helpful home owner, vs someone that was trying to be a lake bully.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 09:11 AM   #31
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HellRaZoR004 View Post
Lets see...where I believe Rich was does not look like a NRZ. This is based on a rough location of where he indicated the boats were (that appears to have been deleted).

References:
1.) http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2051.PDF
2.) http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2063.PDF

Approximate location:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.6.../data=!3m1!1e3
OK, I see it now. So please delete this whole thread, or half of it! LOL.

So I'll stick by my opinion that this is only a case of a home owner not knowing how to be tactful and helpful and they weren't polite about it. There is no saying that people must be polite (it sure would have gone a long way if they were), so I'll leave it at that.

Checking all reasonable resources we could find, both at the time and after the fact, the two charts were checked and there was no hint of it being a NRZ.

I humbly apologize to all involved for not having all my facts, and for trusting what I thought was two good resources. I even double checked an online map that is supposed to be up to date, so that it's not subject to the problems of having an old printed chart on the boat.

I'll also let the owner of the boat I was on know that we narrowly missed getting a ticket (maybe not actually, as we ended up outside of the 150 ft from the dock in question, it was another boat that had the more active confrontation).

To those that say 'why bother, just go somewhere else', I don't think a bully should be able to continue their cause. It just lets them continue to push people away. So if a lake bully is pushing people away without cause, how do you suggest it is stopped? Boaters shouldn't have to put up with this any more than land owners should have to put up with unruly boaters.

In this case *I* was wrong, and I admit it now that I have learned the truth. But it sure was hard to know, I tried to do my homework, while at the site and also afterwards when at home. No, I didn't pull the tax maps and cross check the written laws with the tax maps. I used the resources available to most boaters on the lake. I even tried to do extra work and checked an online resource that promotes that they have up to date chart data online. I was wrong again!

Feel free to ignore me in the future.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 09:14 AM   #32
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbiesaukee View Post
I am not questioning, just asking. The single boat anchorage applies in a no rafting zone only....is this correct?
I believe yes, but I'll let those that know more than me to correct us if we are wrong.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rich For This Useful Post:
Newbiesaukee (08-17-2015)
Old 08-03-2015, 09:35 AM   #33
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

I sent an email to Bizer and Navionics asking them to update their charts.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 10:22 AM   #34
Island-Ho
Senior Member
 
Island-Ho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 169
Thanks: 15
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Law or not, I can't believe (well maybe I can) that someone would be so dis-courteous and anchor so close to a dock or someone's beach! Please respect the lake and the privacy of the landowners. There are plenty of places where you can anchor, swim, etc. and not be in front of someone's house.
Island-Ho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 10:45 AM   #35
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Well, this get's more interesting, the more research that is done.

Bizer replied to me and I'll just say that details are not as clear as it would seem from posts here. It seems they are working on a reply, I'll let Bizer speak for himself. He said a post may be coming within 24 hours.

But the truth is somewhere between the NH State rules and the NHMP website. Which takes precedence, which may have a typo? Which will write tickets?
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 11:00 AM   #36
Bizer
Senior Member
 
Bizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 314
Thanks: 0
Thanked 224 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Rich, you are wrong, it IS a no rafting area. I have seen MP ticket people for 3 together.

I agree with you up, it is hard to tell where an area is.
It's not hard to tell, it's impossible to tell. First, a quote from NH regulations at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rule.../saf-c400.html

Saf-C 407.03 (a) (7) The area of Winter Harbor from the southern boundary of the town of Tuftonboro tax map 63, lot number 14 to the southern boundary of tax map 15, lot number 20;

I believe NH regulations take precedence to the NHMP website, which has ...

(7) Winter Harbor from the southern boundary of the Tuftonboro tax map 63, lot No. 14 to the southern boundary of tax map 51, lot No. 20.

Problem #1: They look the same, but they are not. Aside from the trivial omission of five words and the use of abbreviations, there is one glaring difference: The NH regulations quote tax map 15, not 51. The first thing I noticed back in 1998 was that there is no Winnipesaukee frontage on tax map 15. I assumed the regulation would be corrected, but it has not. So unless the regulation is re-written, it should not be enforced. So Bizer did the best it could. I found map 51 lot 20 and map 63, lot 14 and drew a line between them as depicted on Bizer's charts since 2000. If this were an error, why didn't anyone, including the NHMP, bring this to Bizer's attention until last fall?

Last fall, I received a disappointing letter from a boater who received a rafting ticket. So Bizer did further digging.

Problem #2: Unlike most towns, Tuftonboro tax maps are not just divided into lots. Their maps are divided into blocks (with a number inside a hexagon) then lot numbers. I don't know any other town that does this. There are three lots numbered "20" on tax map 51 and two lots numbered "14" on tax map 63. Which one do I pick? Bizer failed to notice multiple lots in 1998, so I connected the first "20" that I found on map 51 to the first "14" that I found on map 63. [Google "Tuftonboro tax maps"]

Problem #3: The shoreline of lot Map#51, Block#1, Lot#20 runs east-west. If that is the lot to which the regulations refer, which end is the southern boundary? There is no room for ambiguity.

Problem #4: No direction is specified. The regulation should say something like, "The area west of a line ... " but it does not. Regulations can not be ambiguous. Without a direction, someone might claim that the no-rafting area only applies to boats sitting on the line itself.

Incidentally, from my limited legal knowledge, "innocent until proven guilty" usually means innocent because guilt can not be proven in cases of ambiguous laws.

I wrote the NHMP two months ago asking for a clarification before Bizer's next edition (2016), but they have yet to respond.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Bizer; 08-03-2015 at 01:51 PM. Reason: Clarity
Bizer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Bizer For This Useful Post:
ApS (08-03-2015), Dave R (08-04-2015), DBreskin (08-04-2015), DRH (08-03-2015), Gatto Nero (08-04-2015), HellRaZoR004 (08-03-2015), LIforrelaxin (08-05-2015), Newbiesaukee (08-03-2015), Resident 2B (08-03-2015), Rich (08-03-2015), RTTOOL (08-04-2015), VitaBene (08-03-2015), webmaster (08-03-2015)
Old 08-03-2015, 12:19 PM   #37
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Thanks a lot for this information!

As a boater that wants to follow the laws and to be a polite courteous boater, we need clear laws so as not to have any confusion.

So it seems, as it is now, if someone was ticketed in this area, they should contest the ticket. Sometimes this is a difficult choice as it can cost more to go to court in lost wages than to just pay the ticket.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 12:50 PM   #38
Lake Fan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Whortleberry Island
Posts: 79
Thanks: 11
Thanked 27 Times in 15 Posts
Default

An average boater with a current chart shouldn't be held liable for poorly written/indecipherable regulations.

I guess I'd better start researching all the No Wake and no Rafting Zone regulations on the lake and cross-referencing them with NHMP and State of NH regulations, as well as confirming the locations with town tax maps before heading out on the lake.

And all that being said, the more courtesy the better on the water from both boaters and shoreline owners alike.
Lake Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 01:08 PM   #39
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

I agree with you! Everyone should be courteous!

Trying to decipher this area from the written law is confusing. Sort of 'it depends on the definition of what "is" is'! LOL

Here are all the tax maps:
http://www.tuftonboro.org/Pages/Tuft...ap%20Index.PDF

Here is map 63:
http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2063.PDF
Here is map 51:
http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2051.PDF

The text of the law says "Southern Boundary of tax map" when referring to both lots that are supposed to mark the NRZ. So I'm not sure if it is describing the location on the map (southern boundary) as to where to find the lot in question (which seems most likely), or to describe the southern boundary of the lot as the point where the NRZ starts and ends.

I would say that the state law has a typo as Bizer mentioned tax map 15 doesn't even touch the lake, and lot 20 on it is no where near the area in question (not to mention there are more than one lot 20 on that map also).

Does anyone care to show how they can interpret this rule in any way other than what Bizer has documented?
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 02:42 PM   #40
caloway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: exeter, nh
Posts: 73
Thanks: 4
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Default Time to get rid of this regulation

All it does is take rights to a public resource away from boaters and give it to a small subset of landowners. It doesn't even effectively address the purported reasons for it's existence--all it does is shuffle the activity around to someone else's dock.

We'd be better off directly addressing the issues involved rather than applying rules in a ham-fisted manner.
caloway is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to caloway For This Useful Post:
noreast (08-03-2015), Resident 2B (08-03-2015)
Old 08-03-2015, 04:24 PM   #41
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

Bizer, are you saying you think the No Rafting Zone is between the two lines you have drawn?
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 07:58 PM   #42
lfm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Alton Bay
Posts: 96
Thanks: 27
Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts
Default She may not have been completely right....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ITD View Post
Hmmmmm, maybe the lady is right.


PART Saf-C 407 RAFTING RULES

Saf-C 407.01 Rafting Rules.

(a) In addition to and in conjunction with the requirements of RSA 270:44, no person, except as otherwise provided herein, shall, in a prohibited location or at a prohibited time:

(1) Form or allow a boat which he or she is operating or in charge of to be a member of a raft consisting of 3 or more boats;

(2) Form or allow the boat which he or she is operating or in charge of to be a member of a raft if any part of such raft is:

a. Less than 150 feet from shore;

b. Less than 50 feet from any other raft; or

c. Less than 50 feet from any occupied single boat which is stationary upon the waters of the same lake or pond; and

(3) Anchor a single boat and cause it to remain stationary upon the waters of a lake or pond, other than momentarily, if any part of such boat is:

a. Less than 150 feet from shore;

b. Less than 50 feet away from any raft; or

c. Less than 25 feet away from any other single boat which is stationary upon the waters of such lake or pond.

Source. #2573, eff 12-30-83; ss by #3010, eff 5-2-85; ss by #4070, eff 06-30-86; ss by #4562, eff 1-3-89; amd by #5862, eff 7-1-94; amd by #5936, INTERIM, eff 1-3-95, EXPIRES, 5-3-95; ss by #6005, eff 3-24-95, EXPIRED: 3-24-03

New. #7904, INTERIM, eff 6-24-03, EXPIRED: 12-21-03

New. #8107, EMERGENCY, eff 6-22-04, EXPIRES: 12-19-04; ss by #8172, eff 9-21-04; ss by #10293, eff 3-20-13

The statute says 150 ft from shore, not the 75 foot long dock. So my math says they could be within 75 feet of the dock.
lfm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 08:03 PM   #43
lfm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Alton Bay
Posts: 96
Thanks: 27
Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lfm View Post
The statute says 150 ft from shore, not the 75 foot long dock. So my math says they could be within 75 feet of the dock.
Revised to consider the geometry of the dock and shoreline. Upon reflection it's hard to imagine a 75' dock perpendicular to the shore in that area.
lfm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 08:35 PM   #44
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Bizer, are you saying you think the No Rafting Zone is between the two lines you have drawn?
Could you be looking at the lat/long lines from his chart?

The NRZ is depicted by the darker blue dot-dash printed line running from the aqua colored star marked 63-2-14 to the red star marked 51-3-20.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com

Last edited by Rich; 08-03-2015 at 10:11 PM.
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2015, 10:16 PM   #45
Bizer
Senior Member
 
Bizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 314
Thanks: 0
Thanked 224 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Bizer, are you saying you think the No Rafting Zone is between the two lines you have drawn?
Based on available knowledge now, I'd say the no-rafting zone is undefined. This regulation begs to be tested in the courts. Based on the email I received last fall, that is what it's gonna take. That Winter Harbor resident (if it's the same one) calls the MP frequently and they oblige by writing tickets. My hunch (and this is only a hunch) is that that resident was the author of this regulation and rushed it through the approval process without proofreading what he wrote.
Bizer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bizer For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (08-06-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 05:20 AM   #46
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

I guess my question would be this: does it deserve to be a NRZ? I'm not sure what the criteria is to designate a NRZ is, but if this area doesn't fit the criteria, and it actually is a result of homeowner "preference," then it might be worth fighting. If, on the other hand, there are legitimate reasons for the designation, then I, personally, would leave it be.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 06:20 AM   #47
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Could you be looking at the lat/long lines from his chart?

The NRZ is depicted by the darker blue dot-dash printed line running from the aqua colored star marked 63-2-14 to the red star marked 51-3-20.
Rich, could you somehow draw a circle where you think Bizer thinks the Zone is? If I understand where he is saying it is a place where boats seldom moor or raft.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 06:35 AM   #48
Not to Worry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 116
Thanks: 46
Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts
Default More Developed?

Really? How could the lake get anymore developed than it is??
Quote:
Originally Posted by HellRaZoR004 View Post
This logic is ultimately flawed. As time progresses there will be more and more development. If every time I come up and get forced to use less and less of 'our' natural resource you are out of your mind.
The logic of respecting each other is not flawed. There is no reason whatsoever to anchor on top of someones home. There are plenty of places on the lake to anchor up without the need to hassle folks. Rich ( no offense intended) started the thread and the discussion has merit but I suspect the real intent was to have more people anchor and annoy the guy than it was to get clarity.

This IMHO should be a thread about reasonable and courteous behavior for the boater and land owner and not about someone arguing that they have the right to use every square inch of the lake...again you may have the right to do so but that does not make it the right thing to do.
Not to Worry is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Not to Worry For This Useful Post:
ITD (08-04-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 07:13 AM   #49
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

My intent wasn't to get more people to go to this area, but it was to alert boaters to a (what I now have learned to be a known and agressive) lake bully.

I had never personally experienced a lake bully before. Everyone on the boats were being courteous, no one was too close or on top of this person's home. It's a small cove and if there are a lot of boats there then some will naturally end up next to his dock. The cove is small enough that everyone is in front of his home.

Perhaps his dock is too long?
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 07:48 AM   #50
HellRaZoR004
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Litchfield/Gilford
Posts: 824
Thanks: 231
Thanked 224 Times in 131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not to Worry View Post
Really? How could the lake get anymore developed than it is??
Huh? Have you checked how many properties (undeveloped land) that are for sale?

I agree the point isn't to harass lakefront property owners, but I would expect the same from them; which clearly was not the case.
HellRaZoR004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 08:13 AM   #51
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Everyone on the boats were being courteous, no one was too close or on top of this person's home.
This is the key for me--live and let live.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 08:17 AM   #52
Bizer
Senior Member
 
Bizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 314
Thanks: 0
Thanked 224 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Rich, could you somehow draw a circle where you think Bizer thinks the Zone is? If I understand where he is saying it is a place where boats seldom moor or raft.
There is a no-rafting zone is depicted on Bizer's chart on the northeast side of Tuftonboro Neck, west of light 15, and north of Winter Harbor Way. It is outlined with a blue dashed line. [See photo above in post #36] That was my best guess back in 1998, but that was before 2014 when I discovered that there were multiple lots with the same lot numbers on tax maps. No one has the authority to unilaterally pick which "lot 20" is the one. And since the true, on-file regulation in Concord has never been corrected, it is my best estimate that the no-rafting zone lies somewhere north of a blue Pontiac with Iowa plates. In other words, it can't be defined. Keep in mind, IANAL.

I have deleted that NRZ from my database pending a response from NHMP.
Bizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 09:03 AM   #53
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Siksukr,

I'm trying to be general here as the webmaster asked me not to be specific with the area, or post any identifying pictures. I think the area you pictured is the NRZ roughly depicted by Bizer (I didn't check it closely but as area 1, 2 3 and 4).

We (the boat I was on) was anchored about here:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/43...!3m1!1s0x0:0x0
If you look close to the satellite view, you can see that to the West or Northwest side it gets shallow and rocky, so boats can't be easily near that shoreline, and that shoreline is not that far away from the homeowners dock. By the time you pick a spot and set your anchor, or if your boat swings on its anchor rode in the wind, you may end up in this homeowner's sights.

There already was a few other boats anchored here:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/43...!3m1!1s0x0:0x0

We didn't want to be on top of the other boats, and also didn't want to block the entrance to 'The Basin', so we slowly made our way to the northeast of the other boats and ended up about where the first location is shown.

The next boat coming in did the same thing as we did, and went past us, and this is where the homeowner jumped into the water and swam over to them to tell them to move.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com

Last edited by Rich; 08-04-2015 at 01:47 PM. Reason: corrected direction
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 09:49 AM   #54
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JTA View Post
OK, so the boats are within their rights but why anchor basically in someone's yard (even though legal)? There are many spots to anchor and swim that don't come in front of someone's waterfront property. Would I park my car in the street in front of someone's house and then have a tail gate party? I live near a spot where a few boats anchor and swim and stay far enough out from land to be courteous.
I'd tried to hold my breath (fingers) but I wanted to respond to this.

I've heard this type of argument before, "It's a big lake, go somewhere else", "I wouldn't park in front of your home and make lunch, why would you do it to someone else".

To use the auto parking analogy, this argument is similar to someone that buys some property to build a home, or buys a home next to a popular scenic spot.

Perhaps it's a long standing lovers lane, or a place with a great view, or across from a park or other scenic spot that the general public has been using for years. Some particular spots just have a feeling of serenity and will naturally be a draw to people, so maybe it's just a spot that people like to visit and enjoy.

Now the homeowner moves in and doesn't like all the people parking near their home or spoiling their view, so they start to complain, being a pest to the people that simply want to admire nature, the view or enjoy the peaceful serene beautiful spot. The homeowner becomes a bully thinking that if they can make people feel uncomfortable enough, that after time, slowly people will stop coming.

Perhaps the homeowner takes it to the next level and works on some legislation to declare the area off limits to too many people.

After time, when people hear a story of someone being driven away from the area, the response is: Why do you need to stop at that particular spot when there are so many other nice spots to go?

Or we could ask: If the homeowner doesn't like so many people to be near their home, then why did they buy a home that is adjacent to a spot that is known as a beautiful place to visit?

I think it's better to have everyone share the beauty in harmony. Part of the beauty of the lake is also the boating on the lake, the children swimming in the lake, the grandparents watching the children enjoying the lake by dangling their legs in the water to cool off.

Yes it's a big lake, and all of it is beautiful. Many people have their favorite spots, homeowners don't get to carve out their own private area and say 'stay away from me', no more than a boater or fisherman can say 'this is my private spot to fish' or 'my family and I have been anchoring in this spot for years so stay away'.

Now we have learned (thanks to Bizer) that this area is not cleanly a legal NRZ. My guess is that the MP is stuck between a rock and a hard place with this and it needs to be legally cleaned up so we all can live in harmony.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com

Last edited by Rich; 08-05-2015 at 09:40 AM. Reason: spelling typo
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Rich For This Useful Post:
DBreskin (08-04-2015), HellRaZoR004 (08-04-2015), noreast (08-04-2015), thinkxingu (08-04-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 10:06 AM   #55
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

I get that we don't want to badger people personally, but if this is a legitimate issue we should be able to be more specific.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 10:17 AM   #56
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkxingu View Post
I get that we don't want to badger people personally, but if this is a legitimate issue we should be able to be more specific.
I was asked not to by the big boss... so I'm happy to follow his guidelines while I'm in his house.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 10:25 AM   #57
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

I gotchoo--was just sayin'.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 12:00 PM   #58
caloway
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: exeter, nh
Posts: 73
Thanks: 4
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Default Making lemonade.

That part of Winter harbor is a great place to tube. Clear 1000' from shore headway zones. I generally don't like tossing people around with wake, so not having a bunch of boats anchored there is a bonus.
caloway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 12:55 PM   #59
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,712
Thanks: 218
Thanked 590 Times in 344 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post

Yes it's a big lake, and all of it is beautiful. Many people have their favorite spots, homeowners don't get to carve out their own private area and say 'stay away from me', no more than a boater or fisherman can say 'this is my private spot to fish' or 'my family and I have been anchoring in this spot for years so stay away'.
I was in Braun Bay early on Sunday and the MP came by to tell me and the other folks that were there early to tell people not anchor within 25' of my boat, and to call them if anyone ignored my instruction. They said there would be no warnings given, just tickets. I politely explained it to all who tried to anchor near my boat (not because I care about the 25 feet or had any intention of dropping a dime an anyone, but because I did not want to see anyone get a ticket) and people anchored with plenty of room. I honestly don't think the MP really expected anyone to call, they got their point across perfectly and the news spread really quickly.

So, knowing that... Oddly enough, NRZs allow one to make one's own private anchoring spot. If you want to have a 50 foot area with no boats in it around your boat, arrive at a NRZ early in the day and raft up with another boat when the place is empty. Once you've done that, no one can legally anchor within 50 feet of you of any part of your boat.
Dave R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 01:34 PM   #60
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

That is a tactic I've heard people use, there at Braun bay and also at the West Alton Sandbar.

I've heard in the past that they are more aggressive policing the West Alton sand bar than they are at Braun bay, but the few times I've been near Braun Bay (I usually get there late and stay to the extreme left of the popular spot), I've seen the MP come in, cruise around, then hang out near by for a while and then leave.

It's sort of funny that you can raft with two boats in a NRZ, it sort of is a confusing law

At least there is a clear designated NRZ at these two popular spots on the lake, unlike the controversy about the area in Winter Harbor.

The day I was there was the first time I had ever been to Winter Harbor. I can see the attraction as there is little boat traffic at the North end of Winter Harbor, just a lot of anchored boats and people pleasantly enjoying the water and calm serene place to anchor.

At the other end of Winter Harbor there were many people tubing, water skiing, etc. But even with this activity, the water was relatively calm compared to other large bays on the lake.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 02:00 PM   #61
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Just to show that Bizer isn't the only reference to this NRZ, here is what Navionic's web app shows as the NRZ.

Since people have a hard time seeing the fine print of the NRZ, I enhanced the NRZ boundary in a thicker red line.

With both Bizer and Navionics, there are at least two independent sources that think that this is the NRZ in Winter Harbor. But now that Bizer is saying that they are removing it from their chart (the source I trust the most on the lake), it's going to get interesting out there.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 02:09 PM   #62
GTO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 975
Thanks: 256
Thanked 294 Times in 136 Posts
Default yawn......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Just to show that Bizer isn't the only reference to this NRZ, here is what Navionic's web app shows as the NRZ.

Since people have a hard time seeing the fine print of the NRZ, I enhanced the NRZ boundary in a thicker red line.

With both Bizer and Navionics, there are at least two independent sources that think that this is the NRZ in Winter Harbor. But now that Bizer is saying that they are removing it from their chart (the source I trust the most on the lake), it's going to get interesting out there.
I think instead of doing all this investigating NRZ's and maps and laws and peoples rights and 150' rules and how to better understand them, I would of been out anchored somewhere on the lake in a nice quiet area enjoying it.
__________________
GTO
GTO is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to GTO For This Useful Post:
chasedawg (08-04-2015), Gatto Nero (08-04-2015), Not to Worry (08-04-2015), rick35 (08-07-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 02:15 PM   #63
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Well, right now I'm not on my boat... I'm sitting at a computer far from the lake. So it's easy to do some research. LOL

If I had my choice, I'd be on a nice quiet spot on the lake and enjoying it!
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rich For This Useful Post:
VitaBene (08-04-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 02:17 PM   #64
HellRaZoR004
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Litchfield/Gilford
Posts: 824
Thanks: 231
Thanked 224 Times in 131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTO View Post
I think instead of doing all this investigating NRZ's and maps and laws and peoples rights and 150' rules and how to better understand them, I would of been out anchored somewhere on the lake in a nice quiet area enjoying it.
Isn't that what people were trying to do in the first place?
HellRaZoR004 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to HellRaZoR004 For This Useful Post:
noreast (08-04-2015), Rich (08-04-2015), thinkxingu (08-04-2015), VitaBene (08-04-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 02:27 PM   #65
That Guy
Senior Member
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 182
Thanks: 37
Thanked 74 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Ya'll need a hobby.
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 03:46 PM   #66
Bizer
Senior Member
 
Bizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 314
Thanks: 0
Thanked 224 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Just to show that Bizer isn't the only reference to this NRZ, here is what Navionic's web app shows as the NRZ. ...
Well, ... not quite. Navionics licenses Bizer's map, so it's all my fault. It was all my interpretation back in 1998 and has been on Bizer's map since 2000. I'm surprised no one notified Bizer for 14 years, especially the NHMP. It will not be on my 2016 map without an agreement with the NHMP.
Bizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 04:26 PM   #67
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

That is just crazy. Why would there be a NRZ there because that is not where people raft or moor- at least for the most part.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 04:42 PM   #68
PENIVISA
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 45
Thanks: 17
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
Talking

Listen lets just solve this problem and put this behind us.
Donate to "My Fund" so I can by the house and I`ll let you all come over and float about
PENIVISA is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to PENIVISA For This Useful Post:
gillygirl (08-05-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 04:53 PM   #69
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizer View Post
Well, ... not quite. Navionics licenses Bizer's map, so it's all my fault. It was all my interpretation back in 1998 and has been on Bizer's map since 2000. I'm surprised no one notified Bizer for 14 years, especially the NHMP. It will not be on my 2016 map without an agreement with the NHMP.
OH this is too funny! So when I last contacted Navionics to report a problem with markers in the wrong location, and they said they would check with their Cartography department, in fact it was you all along!

Now I no longer feel guilty when I use my Raymarine chartplotter that doesn't accept your Bizer chip and I'm forced to use the Navionics chip!

Thanks for the great charts of the lake!
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 05:03 PM   #70
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
That is just crazy. Why would there be a NRZ there because that is not where people raft or moor- at least for the most part.
Why are there NRZs on the lake at all, especially in places such as this one in Winter Harbor?

Why can't we safely anchor over night on the lake when it's not a problem with every other lake in the state and in almost every other lake in the country?

Perhaps because some people don't like others enjoying themselves after they buy a waterfront house on the lake (NIMBY syndrome)?

I for one don't see the need for laws like these, especially if boaters are behaving themselves and respectful, and they have the proper sanitary facilities on board.

If a boater doesn't behave properly, punish the bad boaters, not all the rest of us that are polite and respectful of others and the environment.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 05:13 PM   #71
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

Because SOME people unfortunately do NOT behave themselves. That's what we need ALL rules and laws.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 05:46 PM   #72
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Because SOME people unfortunately do NOT behave themselves. That's what we need ALL rules and laws.
So punish SOME people that misbehave, not the rest of us that know how to follow the rules and laws.

There already are noise laws.
There are already plenty of laws to protect the environment.
There are already safety rules for boating (and night boating/anchoring).

Oh, I'm going off topic of my own thread... just ignore me!
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com

Last edited by Rich; 08-04-2015 at 05:48 PM. Reason: off topic! LOL
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 07:48 PM   #73
chasedawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Melvin village
Posts: 346
Thanks: 348
Thanked 175 Times in 90 Posts
Default Enough!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
So punish SOME people that misbehave, not the rest of us that know how to follow the rules and laws.

There already are noise laws.
There are already plenty of laws to protect the environment.
There are already safety rules for boating (and night boating/anchoring).

Oh, I'm going off topic of my own thread... just ignore me!
Sorry Rich I have had enough of your rant and beating your chest. Ok you have proved your point. Congratulations you discovered a flaw in the system.

And it all started with a homeowner having enough of being overwhelmed with new neighbors (boaters) everyday not knowing who they are or how long they will stay and if they will be discharging their bilges off the front of their waterfront.

Think about the home owner. How would you like it if you dreamed all week during work about walking down to your dock on a Sunday morning with your cup of coffee. And then out in front of you are people you don't know staring at you and watching you. And how long they are going to stay? Will they be there all day? When I go back to my dock to have an evening cocktail hopefully in peace and quiet to listen to the call of the local loons....will they still be there? It could become very upsetting. This is what this neighborhood could be facing.

What I find is very disturbing about this thread and not the discovery by you and Bizer error, but that it was allowed to zero in on the exact neighborhood. I have friends in that area that have lived there for years and had to put up with at times very inconsiderate boaters. It can become overwhelming dealing with this issue.

Maybe they had enough and let off their frustration. I don't know. Your description of the gentlemen ranting is not at all like the people I know there. Unfortunately, for that neighborhood you have in detail told the whole internet..."Oh guess what I have found... here is a great place to go raft. I won't be surprised if these fine folks were to now petition for the NRZ. This is too bad because they now are going to be swamped with curious onlookers. Thanks Rich!
chasedawg is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to chasedawg For This Useful Post:
garysanfran (08-04-2015), harbor guy (12-20-2015), Not to Worry (08-05-2015), SAMIAM (08-05-2015), tis (08-06-2015)
Old 08-04-2015, 09:10 PM   #74
garysanfran
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Francisco/Meredith
Posts: 749
Thanks: 219
Thanked 273 Times in 126 Posts
Default Rich...You made the following statements...

You posted these statements...

"People need to know that the 150 ft rule is headway speed only, it doesn't mean you have to anchor any certain distance away from a dock. If you like, you can anchor within an inch of someone's dock. Not that I would do this, but you could legally do it if you wanted to prove a point! Just always be courteous and polite. "

"Why can't we safely anchor over night on the lake when it's not a problem with every other lake in the state and in almost every other lake in the country?"

So, you have no problem anchoring overnight one inch off someone's property?

May I suggest you take your boat to one of the "other lakes in the country" you refer to that allow overnight anchoring and have your way there. Far away!

And, may I suggest you re-think your definition of considerate!
__________________
Gary
~~~~_/) ~~~
~~~~~~~~
garysanfran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 09:13 PM   #75
garysanfran
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Francisco/Meredith
Posts: 749
Thanks: 219
Thanked 273 Times in 126 Posts
Default One more thing ...Rich!

Anchor one inch off someone's property, I think you should share their property tax bill!
__________________
Gary
~~~~_/) ~~~
~~~~~~~~
garysanfran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 09:14 PM   #76
Acrossamerica
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 239
Thanks: 0
Thanked 133 Times in 66 Posts
Default

Very Interesting subject. Personal observation reveals that certain areas of the lake have lake front homeowners that do have that "do you know who I am' persona and the local town fathers are paranoid about upsetting them as they do after all pay a majority of the taxes that keeps the rest of the natives in comfort at really low taxes. However, while these good folks do pay the taxes, they do not tend to be the supporters of the local businesses. It is the boaters who keep the local retailers and restaurants alive. So there is a bit of a stand off and usually an uneasy truce between the two factions.

Never could understand why given the size of some of the sleeps six to eight craft on the lake why they could not actually enjoy an overnight anchorage but that might lead to a Tony Soprano type docking and then we would be back to the "do you know who I am" folks really getting upset.
Acrossamerica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 09:33 PM   #77
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Chasedawg, I'm very sorry you feel this way.

I have totally different thoughts when I see people enjoying the lake. I think of the good feelings people have when they are on the lake. And the serenity that people feel when on the lake when they are sharing it with friends.

Maybe you don't know, but when I'm not out on the lake with my boat or on a friends boat, I spend every weekend at a dock, on my boat in a small cove. Other boats and fishermen pass within inches or feet of my boat all weekend long. Some early morning and others late at night. Sometimes before dawn or after sunset.

I always greet them with a wave and a smile and say 'how are you' as many are close enough to to me to have a conversation as if they are sitting next to me. If they are heading out I may say 'have a great day on the lake'. If they are heading back in, I may ask if they had a good day or ask where did they go, and how did they enjoy it.

If they are fishing I ask 'how are the fish biting, are you cooking them or catch and release'? (most seem to catch and release)

Many come to our cove to hang out, or to paddle by, or some to swim or hang out. Some just come and go with their boats as a start or end to their day on the lake or heading to their island spot.

I sit on the dock in the morning with my cup of coffee and enjoy it all. Or late in the evening with the sun going down and still enjoy seeing everyone coming and going.

I've made good friends at the lake and I hope to make a lot more.

The lake brings us all together in a nice way, at least I think so.

No matter where you are on the lake, it should be shared, that's what it's all about IMHO.

Share the lake, be happy about it.
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2015, 10:39 PM   #78
garysanfran
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Francisco/Meredith
Posts: 749
Thanks: 219
Thanked 273 Times in 126 Posts
Default Rich...

Care to share the location of your dock as you have outed the location of others?

Quote...

"No matter where you are on the lake, it should be shared, that's what it's all about IMHO.

Share the lake, be happy about it. "

...Are you voting for Bernie Sanders?
__________________
Gary
~~~~_/) ~~~
~~~~~~~~
garysanfran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 05:36 AM   #79
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,104
Thanks: 1,243
Thanked 1,371 Times in 685 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garysanfran View Post
Care to share the location of your dock as you have outed the location of others?

Quote...

"No matter where you are on the lake, it should be shared, that's what it's all about IMHO.

Share the lake, be happy about it. "

...Are you voting for Bernie Sanders?
What does Bernie Sanders have to do with sharing a resource owned by all?

This thread has turned sideways!!
VitaBene is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
Rich (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 05:42 AM   #80
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garysanfran View Post
You posted these statements...

"People need to know that the 150 ft rule is headway speed only, it doesn't mean you have to anchor any certain distance away from a dock. If you like, you can anchor within an inch of someone's dock. Not that I would do this, but you could legally do it if you wanted to prove a point! Just always be courteous and polite. "

"Why can't we safely anchor over night on the lake when it's not a problem with every other lake in the state and in almost every other lake in the country?"

So, you have no problem anchoring overnight one inch off someone's property?
Dude, you're either the worst reader in the universe or just love to manipulate what people say.

I think this thread is going way too far, so let me sum up what I've taken from it:

This area is a clearly questionable NRZ--the owner believes it is, but there's no evidence of it on the OP's navigational chart, and instead of dealing with an honest mistake politely, the owner acted irrationally. The OP clearly stated that the boaters were being respectful and that he understands that privacy is important, but that there needs to be a balance between the people who own the land and the public that owns the lake.

I'm not too keen on how much the OP's words and intentions have been twisted around, but I see it a ton on other threads that go in the wrong direction.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to thinkxingu For This Useful Post:
gillygirl (08-05-2015), HellRaZoR004 (08-05-2015), Rich (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 06:20 AM   #81
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,367
Thanks: 869
Thanked 420 Times in 304 Posts
Post "Much ado about little"...

As I actually live on Winter Harbor, I thought I'd chime in.

In addition to a huge part of the boating public out on the water, we experienced a perfect weekend that included very strong winds. The narrow part of Winter Harbor being discussed is very well protected from strong winds, so it would be a natural location for the public to anchor. This "crowding" issue may come up on occasion, but only on the weekends where weather is a factor. (A sudden storm is another matter).

BTW: Family members were yelled at in the same location. They'd been picking blueberries from their boat along the shore—and at all times they were within "The People's Lake".

(But I'm not defending their activities).

ApS is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ApS For This Useful Post:
Rich (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 06:27 AM   #82
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

I don't think there is any question of this being a no rafting zone. I don't think the homeowners is wrong. It has always been known as a NRZ. Apparently something is wrong with the wording. Either maps have been changed since the law went into effect or it was never worded correctly in the first place and never noticed. Stranger things have happened. I have never known the area Bizer is pointing out to be a NRZ though, unless the Zone stretched through that whole area.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 06:32 AM   #83
ITD
Senior Member
 
ITD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts and Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,290
Thanks: 335
Thanked 419 Times in 243 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acrossamerica View Post
Very Interesting subject. Personal observation reveals that certain areas of the lake have lake front homeowners that do have that "do you know who I am' persona and the local town fathers are paranoid about upsetting them as they do after all pay a majority of the taxes that keeps the rest of the natives in comfort at really low taxes. However, while these good folks do pay the taxes, they do not tend to be the supporters of the local businesses. It is the boaters who keep the local retailers and restaurants alive. So there is a bit of a stand off and usually an uneasy truce between the two factions.

Never could understand why given the size of some of the sleeps six to eight craft on the lake why they could not actually enjoy an overnight anchorage but that might lead to a Tony Soprano type docking and then we would be back to the "do you know who I am" folks really getting upset.
I think your observations are very flawed.
ITD is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ITD For This Useful Post:
chasedawg (08-05-2015), harbor guy (12-20-2015), Not to Worry (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 06:43 AM   #84
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,171
Thanks: 599
Thanked 600 Times in 346 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
I don't think there is any question of this being a no rafting zone.
Isn't this EXACTLY what Bizer is arguing?! That it's IMPOSSIBLE to tell of it is or not?

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 06:48 AM   #85
Not to Worry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 116
Thanks: 46
Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts
Default Clarity

Well thanks to Bizer and Rich I think we can all be sure the MP will clarify and ambiguities in the area so, at least one positive will come out of this.
Not to Worry is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Not to Worry For This Useful Post:
thinkxingu (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 08:20 AM   #86
SAMIAM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 2,399
Thanks: 138
Thanked 956 Times in 357 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acrossamerica View Post
Very Interesting subject. Personal observation reveals that certain areas of the lake have lake front homeowners that do have that "do you know who I am' persona and the local town fathers are paranoid about upsetting them as they do after all pay a majority of the taxes that keeps the rest of the natives in comfort at really low taxes. However, while these good folks do pay the taxes, they do not tend to be the supporters of the local businesses. It is the boaters who keep the local retailers and restaurants alive. So there is a bit of a stand off and usually an uneasy truce between the two factions.

Never could understand why given the size of some of the sleeps six to eight craft on the lake why they could not actually enjoy an overnight anchorage but that might lead to a Tony Soprano type docking and then we would be back to the "do you know who I am" folks really getting upset.
I strongly disagree that property owners do not support local business'
The opposite is true. Most people who trailer in for the day have already loaded up on food, beer, ice, soft drinks etc in the town that they are coming from.
They already have boating accessories and most have gassed up on the road where its cheaper.
SAMIAM is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SAMIAM For This Useful Post:
chasedawg (08-05-2015), tis (08-06-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 09:47 AM   #87
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,584
Thanks: 47
Thanked 697 Times in 281 Posts
Default Its a balance... BUT

The tie goes to the boater....

I don't care what you paid for your property.. it does not matter. The lake (up to the high water mark) belongs to the People of NH and is in essence a State Park (although its not technically designated as such, the rules and regs for all of the lakes in NH essentially make them State parks without entrance fees).

That being said, shoreline property owners do have what are called littoral rights to the lake... they can put up docks, moorings, swim lines etc... with State of NH approval and the proper ANNUAL permits. (this is key) As a boater, you cannot block their access to their dock or other permitted items they have off of their property. Of course if it is not permitted properly...

So essentially, unless its a specifically designated area, you can anchor and enjoy the water and the property... up to the high water mark. You follow the rules of Saf-C-407 and should be anchored 150' offshore (there are exceptions to this, Braun Bay for example = 75' offshore) This should avoid any blockage of somebody's dock. Now it might be within your rights to swim in and plop a lawn chair down in 6" of water on someone's beach... but its obv not the socially accepted thing to do. But now we are debating the morality not rules and regs.

The upside of this thread, no doubt there will be some clarification of that particular NRZ.

The lake is a wonderful resource for us all to enjoy... wave and smile! It goes along way!

Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Woodsy For This Useful Post:
noreast (08-05-2015), Rich (08-05-2015), thinkxingu (08-05-2015), VitaBene (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 10:56 AM   #88
Greene's Basin Girl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 1,514
Thanks: 394
Thanked 526 Times in 268 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAMIAM View Post
I strongly disagree that property owners do not support local business'
The opposite is true. Most people who trailer in for the day have already loaded up on food, beer, ice, soft drinks etc in the town that they are coming from.
They already have boating accessories and most have gassed up on the road where its cheaper.
I agree with you!!!
Greene's Basin Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 11:30 AM   #89
ishoot308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Gilford, NH / Welch Island
Posts: 4,137
Thanks: 1,448
Thanked 2,937 Times in 1,117 Posts
Default +1

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAMIAM View Post
I strongly disagree that property owners do not support local business'
The opposite is true. Most people who trailer in for the day have already loaded up on food, beer, ice, soft drinks etc in the town that they are coming from.
They already have boating accessories and most have gassed up on the road where its cheaper.
100% true!!
__________________
It's Always Sunny On Welch Island!!
ishoot308 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 11:37 AM   #90
Pricestavern
Senior Member
 
Pricestavern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Long Island (not that one, the one in NY)
Posts: 307
Thanks: 32
Thanked 70 Times in 48 Posts
Default Property Owner Support

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAMIAM View Post
I strongly disagree that property owners do not support local business'
The opposite is true. Most people who trailer in for the day have already loaded up on food, beer, ice, soft drinks etc in the town that they are coming from.
They already have boating accessories and most have gassed up on the road where its cheaper.
I too, disagree! The amount of $ we've spent on food, fuel, building supplies, sporting equipment, general hardware, boat repairs, household supplies, electricians, dock construction/repair, restaurants, permit application preparations, marina fees, school and property taxes, (and of course, alcohol) for a tiny little camp on an island is staggering. In fact, the vast majority of my paycheck (earned in NY) is transported up to the Wolfeboro- Alton-Guilford area each summer and distributed to local businesses. Money spent in NY is just enough to keep the lights on and wait for lake-season again.
Pricestavern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 02:47 PM   #91
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

A friend had this information. It makes it a little clearer. The only lot ten I can find on Map 51 is the Condos in the Basin.

Last edited by tis; 03-08-2017 at 07:12 PM.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to tis For This Useful Post:
chasedawg (08-05-2015), VitaBene (08-05-2015)
Old 08-05-2015, 07:09 PM   #92
That Guy
Senior Member
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 182
Thanks: 37
Thanked 74 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Its threads like this that make me happy I'm poor and live on a small lot in the Boonies.
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 06:09 AM   #93
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,367
Thanks: 869
Thanked 420 Times in 304 Posts
Arrow Different Areas Described...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
A friend had this information. It makes it a little clearer. The only lot ten I can find on Map 51 is the Condos in the Basin.
The letter describes a ratio of length to width being approximately 2:1. The NR zone described in that letter is very different than the one accredited to Navionics, below.



The Navionics' NRZ shows a ratio of length to width being closer to 8:1.

The Navionics' area outlined in red abuts a heavily-trafficked boating area, with active docking, surfing, skiing, wakeboarding, and tubing observable even yesterday—mid-week. Rafting is rarely seen along that shoreline—which is not to say that a NR zone could never have existed there. My wall-mounted 1993-1994 Duncan chart shows no NRZ in the area, although twenty-one years ago, Winter Harbor hadn't yet seen the explosion of water sports locally. Back then, rafters could choose any place to raft in any part of Winter Harbor.
ApS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 08:44 AM   #94
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
A friend had this information. It makes it a little clearer. The only lot ten I can find on Map 51 is the Condos in the Basin.
Tis,

Thanks for this info and bit of very relevant history, I'm sure it will help those trying to figure this out a lot.

Reading this the 'history' section describes the 'problem' area fairly clearly, but as Bizer has pointed out, the 'ruling' section is very ambiguous, at least it is today. I wonder if back then, perhaps there wasn't more than one lot 20 on the maps that were referenced at the time?

It seems to me that the wording of the written law needs to be corrected, or people could easily win fights against any tickets in this area in court.

Also I wonder why they chose to reference two different maps when, if the intention is as some people believe, both lots mentioned are clearly on one map (63)?

Last question: I don't understand your reference to lot ten as I don't see it mentioned anywhere. Did I miss something?
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 10:18 AM   #95
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

Sorry I meant 20 not ten.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 10:25 AM   #96
Rich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Derry / Gilford
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 32
Thanked 264 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Makes sense now, thanks!

I just noticed to Bizer's point that NH State Law trumps the NH Marine Patrol rules, the NH MP web site says this at the top of their rules on their web page:

Quote:
For Exact Wording, Refer to Department of Safety Administrative Rules, Chapter 400
and New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated (RSA) Chapter270
What that means, considering the typo we all agree is on the State Law page, I'm not sure.

I wonder if the actual NH Law 'book' is correct and perhaps the reference to 'map 15' instead of 'map 51' is just a web page typo on the NH law web page?
__________________
Rich
Don't listen to me, obviously I don't understand what I'm talking about!
Let's help each other save time and money: WinniGas.com
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2015, 05:34 AM   #97
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,367
Thanks: 869
Thanked 420 Times in 304 Posts
Post 'Thought it Needed Attention...



Not to put too much of a fine point on it, but...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
"...Why can't we safely anchor over night on the lake when it's not a problem with every other lake in the state and in almost every other lake in the country...?"
Within the six restrictions listed in Obstructing Navigation, The Boater's Guide to New Hampshire handbook states:

Quote:
It is illegal to:

♦ Anchor overnight on any inland body of water.
ApS is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ApS For This Useful Post:
Rich (08-07-2015)
Old 08-07-2015, 06:08 AM   #98
Dad sold the C * C
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 261
Thanks: 98
Thanked 58 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post


I wonder if the actual NH Law 'book' is correct and perhaps the reference to 'map 15' instead of 'map 51' is just a web page typo on the NH law web page?
That would be something to look into. When we bought our house the tax map number was flipped flopped with my neighbors house (same owner at the time). We got this fixed on the OFFICIAL town map, but took a while to get corrected on the web site. I know we will be dealing with this issue in the future as we try to sort out things like Dock Permits and anyone that references an old document. Fortunately the frontage is different on both lots and that is normally referenced in most applications
Dad sold the C * C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2015, 06:40 AM   #99
Bizer
Senior Member
 
Bizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 314
Thanks: 0
Thanked 224 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
A friend had this information. It makes it a little clearer. The only lot ten [sic] I can find on Map 51 is the Condos in the Basin.
TIS, does your friend have access to the original petition as that may be an important indicator of the original intent of this regulation.

If you look at my map in post #36, above, I show where all three lot #20s reside on tax map 51.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
,,, I just noticed to Bizer's point that NH State Law trumps the NH Marine Patrol rules, ...
TIS provided some substantial information in post #91. The document signed by Commissioner Flynn in 1997 is the law and trumps the NH web site. The NH legislature allows the Commissioner of Safety to issue regulations provided that certain conditions are met (e.g petition, hearings, etc). Based on the verbiage of that document, the conditions were met, so that document defines the regulation.

So, that eliminates any dispute as to whether it's tax map 15 or tax map 51, but problems #2, 3, and 4 in my post above still stand. However, Commissioner Flynn's ruling mentions "the towns of Wolfeboro and Tuftonboro", but does not say which town's tax maps are to be used. That is why I'd like to see the original petition submitted that initiated this issue.
Bizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2015, 08:06 AM   #100
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,564
Thanks: 454
Thanked 799 Times in 552 Posts
Default

He has all the paper work for this issue.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:18 AM.


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

This page was generated in 0.54232 seconds