![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Calendar | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#201 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 329
Thanks: 134
Thanked 101 Times in 66 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#202 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
![]()
If it would increase safety at that particular location, what exactly is so funny about it? It would widen the zone, making it possible for 2 boats to pass on plane (oh the horror!). Why go on and off plane, creating massive waves in the process, when you don't have to?
__________________
Getting ready for winter! |
![]() |
![]() |
#203 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kuna ID
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 246
Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts
|
![]()
Yeah let's talk about the tail wagging the dog. A small minority of people who push for a NWZ that affects everyone. Then when asked to quantify the reasons why the answers given are either embellishments beyond belief or just plain fictitious.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#204 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,231
Thanks: 400
Thanked 460 Times in 308 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
The bold above is mine. The other night I typed up a response to a post and strongly suggested that POWER over others was the Real Issue....in the SL case and the NWZ.........and every other wacko law that "some" people ..come up with for the lake. I deleted my post....then. Now I see I'm not alone in my thoughts. Thanks MAXUM. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#205 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 498
Thanks: 62
Thanked 71 Times in 32 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#206 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,949
Thanks: 80
Thanked 969 Times in 432 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#207 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 662
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#208 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 329
Thanks: 134
Thanked 101 Times in 66 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
So...I wasn't "guessing" to begin with. Now if you'll excuse me I have a bit of work to do before cocktail hour begins. You sound like a very angry person. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#209 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 662
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#210 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#211 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,372
Thanks: 710
Thanked 758 Times in 393 Posts
|
![]()
MARK YOUR CALENDARS !!!!
Today's Meredith News reports that there will be a new hearing on the Barber Pole NWZ on October 1, at 10:00 A.M. at the Tuftonboro Meeting House. According to the article, the original petionners (you know who you are) failed to notify all the property owners and the public. As aresult, 39 people petioned the Dept. of Safety for a new hearing. Let's all show up in force for this one. Should buses be chartered to bring in all the people who missed the original "hearing" ? |
![]() |
![]() |
#212 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 176
Thanks: 17
Thanked 22 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Having reviewed some of the documents relating to this NWZ I find it interesting that 3 or 4 "prominent" SBONH members are appellants. What does this say? In reading some of the letters sent to the DOS from the island people it's easy to see they are indeed the one's most affected. Clearly it is a bad situation. Then here comes the SBONH crowd challenging their assertions. And then the origin of SBONH last December with the mission to oppose the SL...well it seems rather transparent what their opposition to a NWZ is all about. I suspect their appearance in droves will make this clear to those who will be entrusted to make the proper ruling. There was a sense that the appearance of the GFBL crowd in Concord did more to help pass the SL than to defeat it. History does tend to repeat itself.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#213 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 378
Thanks: 710
Thanked 116 Times in 58 Posts
|
![]()
Tuftonboro is having a meeting tonight at 7:00 pm regarding the Barber pole nwz. Not sure where on the agenda it will fall.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#214 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#215 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 561
Thanks: 105
Thanked 237 Times in 126 Posts
|
![]()
Is this different than the hearing in Tuftonboro that was conducted by the Department of Safety earlier today? If so, I'd be interested in knowing what jurisdiction the Town has over this matter?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#216 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,372
Thanks: 710
Thanked 758 Times in 393 Posts
|
![]()
Barber Pole NWZ hearing was held this morning at 10:00 AM at Tuftonboro Meeting Hall. Anyone out there who attended care to share their thoughts?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#217 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
The hearing was held today. The hearing was limited to the 11 individuals that submitted requests for re-hearing. The state will now decide whether or not to allow a full re-hearing, which will make the original hearing null and void and essentially set the process back to square one. If the state decides a re-hearing is necessary we will be notified and we will pass along the information to all. If th state decides a re-hearing is not warranted then the process continues to the state level through the house, senate, etc.
The hearing was fairly well attended. |
![]() |
![]() |
#218 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 378
Thanks: 710
Thanked 116 Times in 58 Posts
|
![]()
I thought it was included in the regular town agenda. My mistake.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#219 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]()
1) I'd "audited" a similar NWZ hearing—in the same building—about ten years ago: No one "in opposition" to the NWZ had appeared at the previous hearing. (Attended by about 30 people). In spite of that turnout, it failed then, but something equivalent is in place near Tuftonboro Neck "Narrows"—today.
![]() 2) At the earlier hearing at the same location, I'd noticed no particular odor—this hearing was different. ![]() ![]() It wasn't "the usual suspect" from Wolfeboro—who's expected to do a rumored eight years for transporting the stuff. ![]() 3) At dinner last evening, I encountered a friendly ![]() After the hearing, she was speaking with an elderly gentleman—could that have been Hal C. Lyon, the author of local Bass-fishing lore? This is turning into a much longer reply than I'd planned! ![]() 4) Anyway, it turns out this person lives at the northern reach of the Barber Pole NWZ, and their family is opposed to that NWZ—saying: ![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#220 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
|
![]()
GRANTED!
"the Original Petition fails to provide the requisite number of signatures with supporting proof that the co petitioners are either residents or property owners pursuant to RSA 270:12,I. Based upon my response within section IV, (sub. 3), the Appellants Motion to Reopen pursuant to RSA 541:3 are granted." The original petitioners must provide proof that a minium number of the original 25 co-petitioners listed in the original document are residents or property owners in Tuftonboro by use of official town record. Since many petitioners are of the same family / property this will be impossible to do. Basically this will cancel the petition outright.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet? Last edited by OCDACTIVE; 10-18-2010 at 05:43 PM. |
![]() |
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (10-26-2010), DEJ (10-18-2010), gtagrip (10-18-2010), Hammond (10-18-2010), hazelnut (10-18-2010), Joe Kerr (10-28-2010), NoBozo (10-19-2010), Pineedles (10-18-2010), Ryan (10-18-2010), Sandy Beach (10-29-2010), Seaplane Pilot (10-18-2010), Skipper of the Sea Que (10-27-2010), trfour (10-18-2010), VitaBene (10-18-2010) |
![]() |
#221 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 6
Thanks: 13
Thanked 10 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
To me it seemed that SBONH did not take sides on the issue but rather challenged the process. I find that to be a very important distinction and applaud them and their efforts to see that a small vocal minority could not push their agenda through the system without allowing ALL in the area the opportunity to provide their input on the proposed NWZ. This was NOT a Go Fast agenda but a DO IT the RIGHT WAY initiative. Regardless of the eventual outcome of the Barber Pole NWZ I admire the goal of SBONH. Responsible legislation makes noting but good (and proper) sense. Wonder how Turtle Boy, Sunset on the Dock, El Chase and their very few verbose and prolific posting cohorts will try to spin this success. Bravo SBONH ![]() |
|
![]() |
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hammond For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (10-26-2010), hazelnut (10-19-2010), Joe Kerr (10-28-2010), NHBUOY (04-12-2011), OCDACTIVE (10-19-2010), Pineedles (10-19-2010), Ryan (10-19-2010), Skipper of the Sea Que (10-27-2010) |
![]() |
#222 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
I think its great that someone is finally stepping up and putting all these old fogies back in their place. All these efforts to slow everyone down are just driving tourists away from New Hampshire. Speed used to be king on Winni, now it is suddenly a bad word? That channel is plenty wide enough for boats to pass each other full throttle. I am a bass fisherman and we need to go through there all the time. If we have to slow down, it costs us money. We are working with our rep to have the speed limit repealed. He will be filing a bill right after the election. Stay tuned. Safe Boaters or Unsafe boaters, I don't care. I just want our lake back the way it was a couple of years ago when you could do pretty much as you pleased without worrying about your speed. I agree with OCD, its time to put the throttle down.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#223 | |
Senior Member
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#224 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Tough crowd.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#225 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 92
Thanks: 23
Thanked 16 Times in 5 Posts
|
![]()
Come on now BearIslandMoose. We're not a "tough crowd" but a wise crowd. Wise to you and your kind of trolling and propaganda.
In your very first post to the forum you said Quote:
The forum isn't buying your bull moose. If you are not Turtle Boy, SOTD, ElChase or APS in moose clothing then I believe they put you up to this. I quoted you and bolded some of your outrageous comments. You attempt to cast a black shadow over a SBONH success. You seem to want to inflame and distract from them and their accomplishment. Your attitude is deplorable. This thread is not about speed but about the process of legislation. We are becoming keenly aware of the tactics of the pro speed limit group and some of their supporters. Those who are afraid of SBONH and wish to discredit them and their organization.
__________________
~ Joe Kerr |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#226 |
Moderator
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to webmaster For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (10-26-2010), chipj29 (10-20-2010), Colby (11-11-2010), DEJ (10-20-2010), gtagrip (10-20-2010), Hammond (10-22-2010), hazelnut (10-20-2010), ishoot308 (10-20-2010), Joe Kerr (10-28-2010), Just Sold (10-20-2010), Kracken (10-21-2010), OCDACTIVE (10-20-2010), Pineedles (10-20-2010), Ryan (10-20-2010), Sandy Beach (10-29-2010), Skipper of the Sea Que (10-27-2010), superdawgfan (10-23-2010), trfour (10-21-2010), VitaBene (10-20-2010), VtSteve (10-21-2010), Wolfeboro_Baja (10-20-2010) |
![]() |
#227 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 423
Thanks: 17
Thanked 212 Times in 134 Posts
|
![]()
Well now, isn’t that interesting; and to think that the illustrious and righteous El Chase told us on August 25, 2010 in post # 128 of this thread that:
“I hope this one last post can get through without editing. If it is, then I promise this will be the LAST time I ever try to opine on this site.” “If it does make it through, then I promise you I will never darken the door of this forum again.” I would not be surprised to see the argument raised that (a) our webmaster is wrong; (b) someone hijacked EL Chase’s IP address; (c) someone else in the El Chase household is using the IP address; or, perhaps (d) that El Chase has abandoned his fellow travelers. This is better than a soap opera. |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to winni83 For This Useful Post: | ||
Hammond (10-22-2010) |
![]() |
#228 |
Senior Member
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#229 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Quote:
![]() In the immortal words of Wednesday-Friday Addams, Quote:
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#230 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
And how is a post under a fake name any different than OCD using the embarrassing name "Safe Boaters" for your go-fast club? You guys are hypocrites. You put on a costume ("We are really only doing this to promote full disclosure of such petitions, it has nothing to do with any objection to being told to slow down. All we really care about is safety."), then challenge other people's righteousness? Give me a break. What a bunch of phonies. You guys were the petitioners and biggest proponents of Bourgeious' undeserved personal NWZ a few years back. Few of those fronting that petition were "local residents" then, and none of you seem concerned that your petition then got through without all this notification of the local residents. Is "Safe Boaters" going to try to have that petition repealed? Are they moving for a new hearing to set that one right? I didn't think so. "Safe Boaters" is obviously nothing more than a group of go-fast cowboys whose sole mission is to get the SL repealed. They are biding their time with these obvious distractions (boating inspections, silly ITL bills, washing Barrett's car), but we all know what they are all about. Put the throttle down...make some Thunder. Now stop recalling me and I'll stop posting, as promised. But every time you drop my name, whether expressly or through reference, I'll be back. You'll know its me because it will be a first time poster pointing out the idiocies of your agendas. |
|
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Bearislandmoose For This Useful Post: | ||
sunset on the dock (10-20-2010) |
![]() |
#231 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 423
Thanks: 17
Thanked 212 Times in 134 Posts
|
![]()
I respectfully suggest to the Webmaster that the IP address of this person be permanently blocked from further posting. At least other people who agree with him have the courage and moral character to continue to post under their member names, and for that I respect them.
|
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to winni83 For This Useful Post: | ||
Ryan (10-20-2010) |
![]() |
#232 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
![]()
I disagree, let him post and let him use whatever name he wants, he really can't hide his agenda.
We have to be open to people that disagree with us, we are not a bunch of Joy Baher's are we? I Remember, when another poster kept changing his screen name, pretty soon no one took him seriously. |
![]() |
![]() |
#233 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 423
Thanks: 17
Thanked 212 Times in 134 Posts
|
![]()
I certainly agree that this forum should generally be open to all and that debate is healthy. However, I think this poster has crossed the line and that was the reason for my suggestion. His words and actions have certainly served to undermine the credibility of whatever cause he is advocating.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#234 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 329
Thanks: 134
Thanked 101 Times in 66 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
As far as the mission of some to repeal or amend the SL, I think most of our leaders in Concord are savvy enough to see what's really going on. A few fringe members of our legislature will be unable to change what most people on the lake have wanted for a very long time. The overwhelming support of the SL by the House, Senate, and letters and emails attests to this. I also hope that if a bill is put forth to exclude the Broads from the SL that there is an opposing bill put forth whereby the SL on the Broads would continue to be 45 MPH but on the rest of the lake it is substantially lower, say 35 MPH.JMO Last edited by sunset on the dock; 10-20-2010 at 08:01 PM. Reason: grammar |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#235 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
winni83's post was not an attempt to "stir the pot", but my reply to it was? Your hypocrisy is matched only by your intellectual dishonesty. I assume that your instant conversion from a "thunder boater" to a "safe boater" must have resulted from a near death experience, and was not driven by some long term plan to reverse the SL?. Come on.
![]() ![]() Please spare me. I looked for "winni83" in the phone book, and can't find anyone by that name, so aren't you crossing the same line? In fact, I have apparently been the only one on this forum using his real name until now. Is OCD somebody's real name? Is Vitabean? You guys sound like the press after they found out Christine O'Donnell had "dabbled in witchcraft" when she was fifteen years old. Get real. This is not testimony before a grand jury. This is an internet forum. As I said, if you want me to stay away, stop taunting me by dropping my name out of the blue for no reason, like winni83 did. If you can't do that, then you get what you get and can't cry "foul" about it. Wah, wah, wah. |
![]() |
![]() |
#236 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
![]()
Funny, I thought this thread was about the NWZ at the Barbers Pole.
Great news that the motion to re-open was granted. No surprise that the usual trolls come out of hiding as soon as news they don't like comes out.
__________________
Getting ready for winter! |
![]() |
![]() |
#237 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#238 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
![]() ![]() Say what? What exactly was I taking credit for? Other than being in agreement with some of the SBONH initiatives, I have no affiliation with them whatsoever. elchase, why don't you take a closer look at what SBONH stands for. You might find yourself enlightened as to the organizations goals.
__________________
Getting ready for winter! |
![]() |
![]() |
#239 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,231
Thanks: 400
Thanked 460 Times in 308 Posts
|
![]()
I suggest that there are a few more Screenames who are using that same IP Address....and one may suprise you.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#240 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 329
Thanks: 134
Thanked 101 Times in 66 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
While you may attempt to take ownership of this forum it is reassuring that your group can no longer do so on the lake by marginalizing others who wish to use this beatiful resource. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#241 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
If you guys had named your group "Fast Boaters of New Hampshire", I'd still disagree with your agenda but would have nothing but respect for your honesty. I respect a good healthy disagreement...democracy in action. But naming yourselves "Safe Boaters", as if the people of NH are too stupid to not see through that, says everything about you and your collective honesty. I've never seen that name said without the speaker putting air quotes around the word "safe". It's like a crooked car salesman using the name "Honest John", or the biggest guy on the football team being named "Little Bill". Ya, that makes it true. And riding the coatskirts of the honorable Power Squadron as they did their inspections to gain false integrity, then introducing ITL-ready bills through some shill of a representative to try to build a false reputation, are the things that really deserve such outrage. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Admit "Safe Boaters" one and only ultimate goal...to repeal the SL, and I will praise your integrity while I work against you. But play these dishonest games, and you have no excuse to call anything "over the line", or calling anyone else "dishonest". What could possibly be more "over the line" or "dishonest" than using the name "Safe Boaters" for this group of cowboys and scofflaws? Instead of directing your outrage at the phony who has embarrassed you with that moniker, you praise him...and you try to make a huge controversy out of something so trivial as a phony post under a phony name that makes a perfect point...on an internet forum. Your protest is so shallow as to be pathetic. I have to give you credit though Joe. Assuming your name is really Joe Kerr, at least you have the fortitude to use your name before you criticize others for not using theirs. Is Joe Kerr really your name? If not, I take that back. And who is this purveyor of wisdom from Vermont? Can I use some of those gems in my upcoming book on the Human Experience? Is that Leo Sandy in disguise? Give me a break. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#242 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
Not sure if this link www.bigbadboat.com is relevant to this thread. If the link works, it has an article about the Safe Boaters of New Hampshire, 'SBONH', that's titled "New Activist Group Seeks to Keep Lake WinniPesaukee Open for Performance Boaters" and it is dated September 23, 2010.
...thankyou very much ![]()
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
![]() |
![]() |
#243 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#244 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Wow. Reading the forum rules at that group's website, it's no wonder nobody with an opposing view has ever joined in. Sounds like they will instantly delete any opposing view, publish the identity of the poster, and then ban him from the site. They reserve the right to delete any post that does not agree with their positions? I guess that answers the obvious question why almost every post on a "safe boating" forum seems to bash a reasonable and popular speed limit (that is working so well), brand those who support it "old coots", and sound like it was written by another member of the Thunder Club.
And most onerous, they threaten to "take legal action" against anyone who tells what is being said on the site...sort of like the rules of the Skull and Bones Society, and the Mafia. So for instance, if we had a post from the founder of the club telling what his real goal for the club is, or bragging about how he disregards our laws, or talking about how fast he has been going on a 45mph lake, or talking about all the alcohol he consumes, like he has done on this forum, and we mentioned that to non "Safe Boaters", he would sue us? And this from the same group of people who have sometimes called the moderator of this forum a "Nazi"? ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#245 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
...good morning Pineedles....hey....got a quik question 4 U......it's that capital 'P' in WinniPesaukee....which is how the www.bigbadboat.com decided to spell it in their headline "New Activist Group Seeks to Keep Lake WinniPesaukee Open for Performance Boaters"
...I honestly have no clue about that 'P' but just maybe it's all about them wanting to put the 'P' as in Performance back into Winnipesaukee? What do you think? Got any insight on their 'P' ?
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
![]() |
![]() |
#246 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 329
Thanks: 134
Thanked 101 Times in 66 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#247 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,532
Thanks: 1,574
Thanked 1,608 Times in 823 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Have a great day! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#248 | ||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#249 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Regarding that Barber Pole No Wake zone situation; you guys were the petitioners and biggest proponents of the undeserved personal No Wake Zone in front of the house of one of your own a couple of years back. Few of those fronting that petition were "local residents" then, and none of you seem concerned that your petition then got through without all this notification of the real local residents. Is "Safe" Boaters going to try to have that petition repealed? Are they moving for a new hearing to set that one right?
[sound of crickets chirping] I didn't think so. The hypocracy is comical. |
![]() |
![]() |
#250 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
And you are such a Democrat. This is so typical a response from someone like you. We have apparently decided that there are no more lines to be crossed. Resorting to such childishness as name-calling might work for you at the bar, but I am not intimidated. Aggressive behavior is no longer going to work for you and your buddies. It doesn't work on the lake, it won't work on the forum. As impossible as this may sound, you have further embarrassed yourself.
Is this how you talk to your little students? This is why home-schooling is gaining so much popularity. Who would want to trap their little girl or boy in a classroom with a "teacher" who talks like this? Do you beat them physically too, or just emotionally? |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bearislandmoose For This Useful Post: | ||
sunset on the dock (10-23-2010), Yosemite Sam (10-23-2010) |
![]() |
#251 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 423
Thanks: 17
Thanked 212 Times in 134 Posts
|
![]()
Let’s see if I have this right. Anyone one who disagrees with BIM, El C or Ed C or his cadre is “emotionally pre-pubescent or blind, or both” or even worse, a “Democrat”. Perhaps some of your supporters might be of that politically persuasion. Your self serving and patently false descriptions of how “heavenly” it is as result of the speed limit fool on one and you are simply preaching to your adoring choir and producing word bites in an attempt to denigrate all those who disagree with you.
As I noted previously: “Obviously, there has been a death among the deities and APS, SOTD, TB, BI, El-C et. al. have been appointed to determine infallibly what is reasonable and civilized for us all, whether it be speed, horsepower, size or type of boat, no wake zones or whatever else annoys or disturbs them from time to time.” BIM, El C or Ed C refers to hypocrisy, childishness and idiocy. He should look in the mirror for perfect examples, assuming that the mirror does not fracture in horror. Your pathetic attempts to insult someone like Hazelnut demonstrate your true character. Suggesting on a public forum that someone may beat children or abuse them emotionally is beyond contempt. When you have no remaining rational arguments, you resort to this. And to think that someone would thank you for that post! Your tactics are those of a megalomaniac and despot. With such a fearless, honest, honorable and never deceptive leader as BIM, El C or Ed C and his band of sycophants, we can all sleep, or boat, well. |
![]() |
![]() |
#252 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
This unmoderated forum is great, it allows you guys to show your real simian selves and degrade into the behavior that you use to display when you were behind the wheels of your thunder boats. The slightest frustration, and you turn into babbling and vulgar bullies.
The lake was just great this summer...just like the summer before. No high speed accidents, nobody killed because someone was driving his (or her) boat too fast. The kids camps were taking their members out canoeing again. Sailing returned in a big way. Trolling for salmon in the Broads was enjoyable again. It was Winnipesaukee the way it is supposed to be... The way it always was before you...the way it is depicted in our tourism brochures and ads. It was shared safely and enjoyably by everyone. You guys repeatedly talked about how the SL did not chase you away or slow you down, so obviously, it was not a problem for you. But that backfired, so now you are trying to claim differently...even resorting to some silly tactic that you are all buying Carvers to swamp us and teach us a lesson. What good sports you are. You just oppose the SL because you did not get your way, as you are so accustomed. You just don't like rules and limitations no matter how reasonable. If we asked for a 200MPH SL, you would have opposed it and you'd be fighting to repeal it. "Safe" boaters my ***. You can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig. |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bearislandmoose For This Useful Post: | ||
sunset on the dock (10-23-2010), Yosemite Sam (10-23-2010) |
![]() |
#253 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 423
Thanks: 17
Thanked 212 Times in 134 Posts
|
![]()
Q. E. D.
Thanks. |
![]() |
![]() |
#254 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to ApS For This Useful Post: | ||
Yosemite Sam (10-23-2010) |
![]() |
#255 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
![]()
Watching this is weird, it's like some of the old usenet groups in the 1990's. I trying to guess who will break Godwin's law first.
Calling someone a Democrat doesn't count. |
![]() |
![]() |
#256 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
I think its you guys that are all the same person. And that person is a 13 year old locked in his room and circumventing the parental controls his parents thought they put on his computer. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#257 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,231
Thanks: 400
Thanked 460 Times in 308 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Hey Moose: You lookin in the mirror again...???? I find that Liberals lookin in the mirror see themselves, and are depressed, and then blame the OTHER side for what they see. Just an observation. ![]() BTW: I agree that there is ONE person using multiple screen names here. It's obvious...........BUT... it adds "LIFE" to the forum......NO..?? And every once in awile... "LIFE" is required to keep the forum....lively...... ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#258 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Sam I am I am Sam I am Sam Sam I am. I would not like them here or there. I would not like them anywhere. I do not like green eggs and ham. I do not like them Sam I Am. Say! I like green eggs and ham! I do! I like them, Sam-I-am! ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#259 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 329
Thanks: 134
Thanked 101 Times in 66 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Thanks for the laughs. |
|
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to sunset on the dock For This Useful Post: | ||
Yosemite Sam (10-24-2010) |
![]() |
#260 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
I just keep thinking how scary it is to think that a guy like this has our little kids for 6 hours a day. Imagine if Mommy really knew who she was entrusting little Suzie to? Very disturbing.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#261 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Are you really a teacher of little kids or is this just a Halloween prank? Please be honest with me, are you Leo Sandy? He's that teacher who always writes those letters to the LDS...is that really you? Now, let's get back on topic. Are you guys going to use the same passion to have your Eagle Island (Bourgeoious) NWZ repealed because it too was "put through under the radar"? I've asked this several times and you guys keep changing the topic and using red herring responses to name-call and turn the discussion into one about me. Just answer yes or no. That Eagle Island NWZ process was IDENTICAL to the BP one in every way, yet not only were you-all behind it because it gave one of your "safe" members a personal quiet zone to enjoy when he was not out in his thunder boat harassing the rest of us, but now you do not want to discuss it because it shows the hypocrisy of your current actions, and shows the lie that "its not about being able to go really fast, we only want these things to be done in the open" really is. Was the SL "put through under the radar" too? You should use also try this argument when you file for that repeal. ![]() I do not care much about the Barber Pole area. I'm over there maybe five times a year and am usually trolling and going headway speed anyway. Bass boaters sometimes pass me going way too fast, but they are not as threatening as a 10000 pound thunder boat and the operators of bass boats can see over their bows, and are rarely drunk, so I don't worry about them running me over. I hope the BP NWZ goes through, only because it is what the people who live there...the people who know first hand what goes on there day in and day out... want. And because I know that the "its not about being able to go really fast, we only want these things to be done in the open" motto was written by the same phonies who gave us "safe boaters"...and I know who they really are and what they are really about. Sorry if all this disturbs you, but you reap what you sow. Now please have that emoticon issue looked into. It might not do any harm in and of itself, but it is a marker for a progressively deteriorating mental state that should be nipped in the bud. |
|
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Bearislandmoose For This Useful Post: | ||
sunset on the dock (10-24-2010) |
![]() |
#262 | ||||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Question:
Quote:
Question: Quote:
Quote:
Question: Quote:
|
||||
![]() |
![]() |
#263 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Quote:
However, every one of SBONH-NHRBA's operatives overlooked that opportunity. ![]() As I am for "equal-opportunity" at forums, I am compelled to repeat that previous phrase once again: Quote:
Quote:
![]() (Or "Bourgeious".) ![]() ![]() Last edited by ApS; 10-25-2010 at 02:16 AM. Reason: Bourgeoious? |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
#264 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
I was asked to come back by one of your gang;
This was the final straw in a long line of taunts by those who had been unwilling to debate me when I was posting before, but saw my promise to abandon as an opportunity to take shots at me and keep dropping my name. My continued silence would have been risking the wrong impression. Interesting that this guy/gal Hammond (probably a fake name) had never engaged me before, and has not engaged me since. He is apparently the type who likes to kick a guy in handcuffs. A combination of having lost my elchase password and the desire to start anew led me to create a new screen name..it was simply easier than asking for a new password, and it gave the opportunity to make that covert post and show OCD for who he really is. And I had gotten tired before of being the only person on this forum who was brave enough to post under his real name, and had regretted doing that once people from your side started "investigating" me and going back and forth to "make big wakes" in front of my home. My problem had been with the editing of my posts by the moderator, the back-breaker being one on this very topic that was edited in a way that turned its intent completely around, causing others to think I was saying the exact opposite of what I had actually written. I did not want to continue posting under such uncertainty. But I was not aware that the moderator was going to start this unmoderated forum, and I feel this is exactly the kind of forum that a debate with the likes of your gang needs. We get to see how vulgar and primitive you all can be, and I get to express my thoughts without waiting three days for them to show up, and then find that they have been changed. I'm enjoying this much more than ever. I do not consider this to be the forum that I swore out of...the moderated forum. Please know though that I will honor my pledge to remain out of that one...unless you guys taunt there too. Last edited by Bearislandmoose; 10-25-2010 at 06:44 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#265 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and just look'n at this picture helps the casual observer to maybe understand why performance boating can get into one's blood, and be such a highly addictive fun-time hobby. The photo helps to answer the question: Why do some simply have 'the need for speed?'
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
![]() |
![]() |
#266 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 43
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Did you read my post?...the same one you quoted?
Anyway...I'm back. And I've decided to stay around. I will stick to my promise to not darken the door of that other forum (the moderated one) anymore. But this one seems much more even-handed, and I don't feel that I have two hands tied behind my back anymore. So you'll simply have to learn to deal with it. Sorry. Ed |
![]() |
![]() |
#267 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 5,788
Thanks: 2,085
Thanked 742 Times in 532 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() But I bothered to have the medical checkups, the training, the eyesight exams, the experience, the head-gear, the body-gear, the inspections, the organizational excellence, the exacting locations and the overwhelming safety considerations for those speeds—which in most cases didn't see the extreme speeds showcased on Winnipesaukee. ![]() ![]() Having "first-hand" observations of extreme speed on Lake Winnipesaukee is never what I had in mind. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#268 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 301
Thanks: 115
Thanked 75 Times in 52 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#269 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Kingstown RI
Posts: 688
Thanks: 143
Thanked 83 Times in 55 Posts
|
![]()
You must have a short memory. How fast can you go with a 10 HP Johnson on a 12 foot boat?
__________________
Gene ~ aka "another RI Swamp Yankee" |
![]() |
![]() |
#270 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
|
![]()
Safe Boaters of New Hampshire
“To promote safety through education and legislation that works” http://www.SBONH.ORG State orders hearing on the No Wake Zone at Lake Winnipesaukee’s “Barber Pole” reopened. Safe Boaters of NH pushes bill to ensure proper notification of future hearings. For Immediate Release: The New Hampshire Department of Safety has reversed its earlier decision establishing the largest no wake zone on Lake Winnipesaukee and has ordered the process reopened. The decision was made after a petition by residents of the area and Safe Boaters of New Hampshire questioned whether proper notification was given since most of the property owners in the area were unaware of the petition until after a ruling had been made, and whether the original petitioners met the legal requirements to file such a petition. The Department of Safety ruled that the legal requirement may not have been met and has ordered the people calling for a no wake zone at Lake Winnipesaukee’s “Barber Pole” to show proof of residency. The department also ruled that proper legal notice was given via publication in the only statewide newspaper in New Hampshire. Safe Boaters of New Hampshire believes that in the era of dwindling newspaper circulation and greater reliance on the internet and other forms of communication, the methods of legal notification accepted in the past are no longer adequate. Safe Boaters of New Hampshire has filed a bill that would address the notification process when a petition to change or restrict the use of New Hampshire’s public waterways is being considered. The bill requires the petitioners to notify the abutters of the area being targeted by certified mail and requires the Department of Safety to post the notification of the petition on the department’s official website at least two weeks prior to the hearing. Regardless of the outcome of the “Barber Pole” no wake zone issue Safe Boaters of New Hampshire firmly believes everyone affected should have an opportunity to know about the proposed changes prior to decisions being made.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet? |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-06-2010), jarhead0341 (11-08-2010) |
![]() |
#271 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Danvers,Ma & Ashland,Nh
Posts: 71
Thanks: 151
Thanked 18 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
No wake ruling reversed after questions raised about process
Staff Report Monday, November 8, 2010 CONCORD — The state Department of Safety has reversed its earlier decision establishing the largest no wake zone on Lake Winnipesaukee and has ordered the process reopened. The Department of Safety ruled that the legal requirement may not have been met and has ordered the people calling for a no wake zone at Lake Winnipesaukee's "Barber Pole" to show proof of residency. The department also ruled that proper legal notice was given via publication in the only statewide newspaper in New Hampshire. The decision was made after a petition by residents of the area and Safe Boaters of New Hampshire questioned whether proper notification was given since most of the property owners in the area were unaware of the petition until after a ruling had been made, and whether the original petitioners met the legal requirements to file such a petition. Safe Boaters of New Hampshire believes that in the era of dwindling newspaper circulation and greater reliance on the Internet and other forms of communication, the methods of legal notification accepted in the past are no longer adequate. Safe Boaters of New Hampshire has filed a bill that would address the notification process when a petition to change or restrict the use of New Hampshire's public waterways is being considered. The bill requires the petitioners to notify the abutters of the area being targeted by certified mail and requires the Department of Safety to post the notification of the petition on the department's official website at least two weeks before the hearing. Regardless of the outcome of the "Barber Pole" no wake zone issue Safe Boaters of New Hampshire firmly believes everyone affected should have an opportunity to know about the proposed changes before decisions being made. |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ronc4424 For This Useful Post: | ||
jarhead0341 (11-08-2010), Ryan (11-08-2010) |
![]() |
#272 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 66
Thanks: 13
Thanked 29 Times in 17 Posts
|
![]()
The Union Leader reported today that the state Department of Safety is re-examining its decision earlier this year to create a no-wake zone in the Barber's Pole area between Tuftonboro Neck and Cow Island. Does anyone have any more deals?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#273 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 444
Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
The petitioners were not able to prove residency or property ownership. The no wake zone has been overturned and hearing is now closed. It is as if it never happened.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet? |
|
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-10-2010), Ryan (11-11-2010) |
![]() |
#274 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,512
Thanks: 3,118
Thanked 1,090 Times in 784 Posts
|
![]()
I have mentioned before that the abbuters were upset over the ruling. Yet BIM beg to differ and disputed my claim.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day. |
![]() |
![]() |
#275 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
The "real residents" of the area were 90% against the NWZ. We circulated a petition and out of the roughly 30 properties only 2 or 3 were in favor of the NWZ. Ironically these were the attendants of the original hearing.
This was a case of a couple of property owners who got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They tried to sneak a hearing in and they almost got away with it. Back in the summer on the weekend of the original hearing one family told some people they were just having a family reunion when they were asked why they were at the house for the weekend. These are the Squirrel Island people that rent the house out all summer. They never mentioned to us that they were actually all there to attend a hearing on the NWZ. The whole situation turns my stomach that these slimy people would try to pull such a sleazy move. I was more ticked off at the process than anything else. As I have said in the past the NWZ would have had some benefits for me personally. I win either way. Thank you SBONH for your support and for shining a light on situations like this where a select few try to dictate the use of a public resource. |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-11-2010), DEJ (11-11-2010) |
![]() |
#276 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
Who owns this Squirrel Island? Maybe a poster here?
It's always nice when something is stopped for the right reasons. It seems that many people now want to pass legislation in the dark of night, and let as few people know about it as possible. Oh well, there are lots of devious people out there with nothing better to do. They hate the fact that somewhere out there, someone might be having a good time ![]() Well kudos to those that sent them back to their dark caves. Always nice when people are thoughtful. |
![]() |
![]() |
#277 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 662
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Happy Veteran's Day ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#278 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 176
Thanks: 17
Thanked 22 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
Somehow I think SBONH's presence in this controversy will not help with their long term plans and agenda and they will regret their involvement. This article appears in today's Laconia Daily Sun.
Thanks to "safe" boaters, full throttle through Barber Pole is OK Nov 17, 2010 12:00 am To the editor, The New Hampshire Department of Safety has reversed its earlier decision that had established a No Wake Zone in the narrow and often busy Barber's Pole channel of Lake Winnipesaukee, at the request of a group of boaters headed by a member of a performance boating club calling itself the "Active Thunder Cult". The Department of Safety makes this reversal based on a technicality raised by this boating group, despite having earlier found that without the no-wake designation, present law "does not provide adequate safety" and that "No Wake speed along this route within Lake Winnipesaukee will improve public safety; maintenance of residential, recreational, and scenic values; variety of uses; and, environment and water quality." Using the moniker "Safe Boaters of New Hampshire", the boating group, whose founder has stated a primary mission of having Lake Winnipesaukee's boating speed limit repealed, has arranged so that most boaters may again travel full throttle through the narrow 2-way channel, even after the Department of Safety had determined that "There is not sufficient availability and practicality of enforcement" to ensure safety in the channel absent no-wake speed limitations. Ed Chase Meredith |
![]() |
![]() |
#279 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hudson - NH
Posts: 408
Thanks: 233
Thanked 212 Times in 88 Posts
|
![]()
Some look for the ugly in every situation. Amazing!
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#280 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 18
Thanks: 12
Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts
|
![]()
Turtle Boy, is that an article written by an unbiased journalist or the ravings of some wack-job in a letter to the editor? Do you even know the difference?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#281 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Gilford, NH / Welch Island
Posts: 5,932
Thanks: 2,290
Thanked 4,943 Times in 1,918 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ishoot308 For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-18-2010), hazelnut (11-20-2010) |
![]() |
#282 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 176
Thanks: 17
Thanked 22 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
For your reading pleasure, from today's LDS
![]() Letters State has changed no-wake-zones to anything goes a number of times Nov 18, 2010 12:00 am To the editor, Mr. Chase should be nominated for Safety Commissioner or perhaps Hearings Supervisor due to the fact that the present office holders are opening a can of worms that could go back as much as 50 plus years. They seem to think they can change their minds when someone squawks that they didn't have time to read the hearing notices in the only statewide newspaper and this malarkey about only residents can sign petitions but anybody in the entire state can file appeals against rulings is a drastic mis-interpretation. Many lake users went to the appeals hearing in Tuftonboro but weren't allowed to speak unless we were appellants and yet we were told that we all own Lake Winnipesaukee. Something is drastically wrong with this picture. As a boater who uses the "Barber Pole" passage on occasion, I believe someone should get out the measuring stick; the channel is not wide enough to allow two vessels going in opposite, or the same, ways the 450-foot clearance to allow speeds up to 45-mph by the current law, nor does it allow PWC's the 600 foot clearance to exceed headway speeds. However we were not allowed to bring this information forward during the appeals hearing. There are many areas on the lake that don't allow these clearances and yet the Safety Department has changed them from "No-Wake-Zones" to do what ever you please zones a number of times. One that comes to mind is the passage in Glendale between Pig Island and Locke Island that for many years was a "No-Wake-Zone", at least from 1969 through the late 1970s and then one year it did not appear on the chart due to a typographical error so the Marine Patrol removed the NWZ indicators and now boats literally fly through the area defying the 150 foot separation requirement as well as the need to slow to headway speed. This area is just around the corner from Marine Patrol Headquarters. We might ask who verified the signatures for residency that were supplied, by NH Recreational Boaters Association, on petitions for the Eagle Island NWZ that was put into place a year or three ago ? And why aren't Center Harbor and Wolfeboro bays as well protected with NWZ's as are Alton and Meredith bays ? If one of the Department of Safety responsibilities is to provide for the safety of all users of Lake Winnipesaukee when and how, other than college kids riding around in patrol boats, don't they address these issues rather than waiting for the populace to request some actions that are so glaringly obvious ? Bill Bertholdt |
![]() |
![]() |
#283 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
It's called being Above Board. I would think that residents and property owners have the right to at least know what's going on behind their backs. I also find it very disingenuous for some to suggest (continually), that in this particular area of the lake, boaters do whatever they choose. You are not only inferring that the SL law and the Safe Passage rules are not working, but you're narrowing it down to this one area. All that after saying how wonderful the lake has been, and how safe it is, after the SL law's passage. Kind of a spin no?
As was clearly evident from the multitude of posts here, residents and other boaters of the BP area were studying the facts of the NWZ issue, and also debating it's pros and cons. That's the way things get done in civilized society. Sometimes it works well, other times maybe not so well. But it's out in the open, and people get their input. There were some pretty good suggestions and discussions overall. Sorry to see some people don't like open discussions. I'd also like to add that SBONH, as they have stated many times, took no stance on the NWZ issue. They preferred to leave the discussion and debate up to the people it would impact the most. In other words, SBONH did not formulate a knee-jerk response. Good form. I say judge them for what they do, not by what people that use fictitious names in newspapers say. |
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to VtSteve For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-18-2010), hazelnut (11-20-2010) |
![]() |
#284 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hopkinton NH
Posts: 395
Thanks: 88
Thanked 80 Times in 46 Posts
|
![]()
Regarding ALL the discussion that's been had in this thread and the two letters to the editor posted here, how can the BP NWZ not be wide enough for two boats to pass each other while maintaining the minimum 150' between both crafts and shore? Using Google Earth, I measured the width of that area; the minimum width I found, shore to shore, was 825 ft while other areas were greater than 900 ft. Two boats passing each other would need an absolute minimum of 450' to allow for distances between themselves and shore on either side. Even if you allow 500', that STILL leaves 300'+ to maintain distance from other boats and shore. What am I missing when so many people are saying it's too narrow?!?!?
Just for reference, the Eagle Island NWZ measured at 710' at it's narrowest, also using Google Earth. I can't tell you how many boats I've seen blowing through this one on plane; I've even caught the Doris E (or Sophie C, I don't remember which) buzzing through without slowing down! Granted, I don't know how accurate (or inaccurate) Google Earth is when it comes to measuring but unless someone has strung a tape measure across or used surveying instruments, it's close enough for me! |
![]() |
![]() |
#286 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 301
Thanks: 115
Thanked 75 Times in 52 Posts
|
![]()
Why is it that all are in agreement with what SBONH exposed this scam except 3 or 4 people in this forum. They tried to sneak a NWZ through the process and got called on it. I guess it's only the sneaks in this forum that are upset about it.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#287 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
I like those odds actually
![]() The real people without an agenda were exposed to what those few folks stand for. Hazelnut and others sought to be inclusionary, and not make reactionary statements pro or con on this issue. HN was also very concerned that the people that lived there were not informed. Pretty much period. I had some people (nobody that's posted on the NWZ threads), ask me privately what I thought of people gushing with sheer delight over the SL issue and how well it's worked, yet when speaking of the BP area, it seems like mass chaos and ultra high speed. I did not once state the obvious. They figured it out themselves. The bottom line is this. As a group, there can, and will be, disagreements over many things. But the vast majority of us try to discuss things out in the open, whether we agree with one side or the other. In this case, there were mixed results over actual NWZ. But there were only the same few that didn't think the methods or means used were pretty sneaky. So some folks decided it was time to let everyone in on this little secret. I think the majority of people in this forum got a real eye-opener from these disclosures. |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to VtSteve For This Useful Post: | ||
hazelnut (11-20-2010) |
![]() |
#288 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 662
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#289 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,512
Thanks: 3,118
Thanked 1,090 Times in 784 Posts
|
![]()
Where's the Barber's Pole? What happened to it? Did the NWZ supporters hold it for ransom?
![]()
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day. |
![]() |
![]() |
#290 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,139
Thanks: 223
Thanked 319 Times in 181 Posts
|
![]()
It's like playing tag on the playground with the kids that only want to play if they can control the rules and make it so they always have a safe zone within arms reach, but it is only for them.
Pretty soon they are talking to themselves in the corner of the playground, shouting random comments at others if they walk by to close. The problem is those kids have grown up to be equally as annoying as adults and they have not changed a bit. Sad really. Get involved and stay involved, it is your right and should be taken seriously. I have a feeling that we are going to start hearing more and more about folks standing up to the weak minded folks that want the rules spun in their favor. Secretly that is, wouldn't want to deal with an opposing view, that is NOT FAAAIIIIRRRR. |
![]() |
![]() |
#291 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
Well said Jmen. There are those that know the only way they can get their way is by cheating or under cover of darkness. They really don't like it when you turn the spotlight on them. I like the fact that so many turned on their spotlights all at once.
They said NOT FAAAIIIIRRRR, then called people nasty names and wrote nasty little letters. Then they go back into the corner. Perhaps they will learn how not to combine their conflicting fabrications in the same thread. |
![]() |
![]() |
#292 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 301
Thanks: 115
Thanked 75 Times in 52 Posts
|
![]()
Summer 2009 = lake wide Shang-gri-la as many posted it was the best
summer ever. Summer 2010 = High speed craziness in the Barber's Pole area and the 150' rule is violated constantly. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to gtagrip For This Useful Post: | ||
hazelnut (11-20-2010) |
![]() |
#293 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 176
Thanks: 17
Thanked 22 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Why is it that some people feel jeans and sweatshirts are appropriate attire when appearing before a legislative body in Concord? .......The answer my friend is blowin' in the wind......... I suspect the people in the BP will indeed get their NWZ. Having spoken with some of the people involved, it seems that in previous attempts virtually everyone on the mainland side of the BP, people on Squirrel and Little Birch Islands, and many people along the BP shore of Cow Is. including many of HN's neighbors and +/-? even the former owner of his house signed in favor of the NWZ. This varies significantly with HN's version of only 3 people in the BP being in favor. I think some of the people on this forum need to read the previously printed (on this forum) emails to the DOS by residents of the BP as to why they felt the NWZ was needed. The DOS agreed. I wouldn't be surprised to see the DOS eventually institute this NWZ by administrative rule, similar to how a SL was instituted on Squam. People are indeed starting to take back the lake from a crowd hanging in the shadows who claim they are a majority but are clearly not. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#294 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
"New Hampshire's procedure for declaring a 'no wake' zone under scrutiny after reversal of 'Barber Pole' decision" is the title of a front page article in today's Nov 20 www.laconiadailysun.com
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
![]() |
![]() |
#295 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mass/Gilford
Posts: 247
Thanks: 216
Thanked 70 Times in 33 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Get out!
__________________
Please do not feel the trolls. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#296 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
Michael Kitch, a reporter for the LaDaSun wrote it, and he writes lots of articles or reports on local town meetings, and in learning journalism, journalism students try to learn the difference between reporting and editorializing, if such a thing is even possible.
To read it like a printed paper newspaper, go to "new LaDaSun format" last message - message #16 for a working link which turns the LaDaSun back into its' old style.
__________________
... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! |
![]() |
![]() |
#297 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 150
Thanks: 19
Thanked 38 Times in 23 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
The fact that the BP NWZ was not established in a manner consisitent with the rules and regulations of the town of Tuftonboro apparently does not matter to you as long as the ends justify the means. The fact that you remain silent on the surrepticious, disingenuous, and unscrupulous manner in which the BP NWZ was initially established is abhorring. It is occasions such as this that are the basis for the contempt and loathing that NH natives and residents express towards individuals such as you, as I am doing now.
__________________
__________________ __________________ So what have we learned in the past two thousand years? "The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of Obamunism should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest the Republic become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." . . .Evidently nothing. (Cicero, 55 BC augmented by me, 2010 AD) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#298 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
You have them pegged pretty well Yankee. They lurk, they smirk, they slither around behind people's backs to get their dirty deeds done. They avoid any and all discussion of facts.
Everyone knows the persona that has stated, many times, that Winni was an absolute boater's paradise last year and this year. He said it was because of the SL. Out of the blue, after slithering around behind people's backs, they come up with a NWZ at the BP. This very same person states (as they all do now), that it's Full Throttle and anything goes in that area. Nobody's heard that before, not until after the NWZ issue blew up in their collective faces. So how can it be true that everything's ok but the BP area is crazy fast? Well it can't be. They know that, so when pressed, they make a few snarky comments directed at the MP about lack of enforcement and move on. The only thing dangerous about this little group of nasty men is their deranged ideas. One of them even stated a preference for having the lake be a large NWZ, as he enjoys that boating the best. But once they found out that the people they hate the most might even discuss civilly the NWZ issue, they got even madder. They had to make it appear that these people drove boats at 200 mph through there. In fact, some suggested it Might be a good idea, and wanted to bring everyone in on it. The gang of grumpy old men would have nothing to do with this. They slithered behind everyone's backs and passed a ridiculous law before everyone woke up. Fact si, they are pathological, never, ever to be trusted. Their motives are about an insincere as any I've head or read about. They'd make DC politicians blush. The only thing they're upset about is that they were found out. If you want to really tick them off and send them packing, just keep spreading the truth. |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to VtSteve For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-21-2010) |
![]() |
#299 | |
Senior Member
|
![]() Quote:
Now for some levity: Enjoy this one TB: ![]() ![]() ![]() http://www2.laconiadailysun.com/story/barber-pole New Hampshire's procedure for declaring a 'no wake' zone under scrutiny after 'Barber Pole' decision By Michael Kitch Nov 20, 2010 12:00 am TUFTONBORO — The New Hampshire Department of Safety last week rescinded its decision declaring the Barber's Pole, the passage between Cow Island and the mainland, a "no wake zone" after representatives of Safe Boater of New Hampshire successfully challenged the legitimacy of the petition prompting the initial declaration. State law (RSA 270:12) prescribes the procedure by which the commissioner of safety may place operating restrictions, including limits on the maximum horsepower or speed of boats, on lakes, ponds and rivers. The statute provides that at least 25 residents or property owners of each municipality bordering the water body may petition the commissioner, who after holding a public hearing may adopt rules to impose restrictions found to serve the public interest. Altogether restrictions have been imposed on more than 50 lakes and ponds, all identified in state law (RSA-270:76-132), through this process. In May, the commissioner received a petition to impose a "no wake zone" on the so-called Barber's Pole strait. A hearing was held on July 21 and on July 30 Commissioner of Safety John Barthelmes issued an order declaring Barber's Pole, a stretch of water about twice the length of the Weirs Channel, a "no wake zone." Many property owners on both Cow Island and the mainland were stunned and surprised by the decision, since they were not aware that a petition had been filed and a public hearing held. Noting the relatively low volume of boat traffic and number of boating mishaps, they questioned the need for a 'no wake zone," which the Marine Patrol has rejected in the past. They claimed that islanders who commute daily and weekly would be adversely affected by the "no wake zone," which one person said stretched the time to traverse the channel to 17 minutes. Eleven residents, including Scott Verdock, the president, and Bob Flannery, the political director, of Safe Boaters of New Hampshire, appealed to reopen the hearing, claiming that the Department of Safety failed to properly notice the public hearing and the petitioners failed to qualify as either residents or property owners of Tuftonboro. Verdonck stressed yesterday that his organization, which formed to oppose legislation setting speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee, was neither for or against the "no wake zone." Instead, he said that his membership was troubled that interested parties were not informed that a change in the operating protocols on the lake was being contemplated and that the credentials of the petitioners were apparently not verified. "One of our members polled 58 residents of Barber's Poll and found only two who favored a 'no wake zone,'" Verdonck said. "We took no position either way. But, changes in the use of public waters should not be done under a shroud of secrecy. All the residents should be given an opportunity to participate in the decision." The appeal was heard on October 1. The commissioner ruled that by posting a legal notice announcing the public hearing in the N.H. Union-Leader, a newspaper circulated throughout the state, the department met its obligation to provide public notification. He noted that the notice should not only be provided to residents or property owners but to all residents of the state, which has traditionaly be done by placing a notice in a statewide newspaper. Verdonck disagrees and has asked Representative John Hikel (R-Goffstown) to file legislation requiring the petitioners to notify all abutters of the forthcoming hearing by certified mail. The process, he said, is akin to the procedure followed by local planning boards and by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services when chemical herbicides are applied to treat milfoil in lakes and ponds. However, the commissioner found that the original petitioners failed to provide adequate proof that the signatories were either legal residents or property owners of Tuftonboro. Barthelmes instructed the petitioners to provide him with the necessary documentation within 30 days. According to Verdonck, they have failed to do so. |
|
![]() |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post: | ||
BroadHopper (11-21-2010), DEJ (11-20-2010) |
![]() |
#300 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
Furthermore all of the residents in the Barbers Pole channel on Cow Island OPPOSED THE NWZ. FACT not OPINION. These are my friends and my neighbors and many of them signed the petition opposed the NWZ. FACT not OPINION Sorry TB. FYI- The number of houses that directly abut the channel on the Cow Island side are 7 total homes one vacant lot with a dock.
|
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post: | ||
DEJ (11-20-2010) |
Bookmarks |
|
|