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

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-22-2007, 01:28 PM   #1
Becca
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default State to Test Boat Speed Limits

Hi All,

This just in from WMUR today!

CONCORD, N.H. -- Proposed statewide boat speed limits appear to be sidetracked for this year, but two popular sections of Lake Winnipesaukee probably will get temporary limits this summer.

Those limits -- in waters around Bear and Rattlesnake islands -- are expected to be 45 mph during the day and 25 mph at night.

The House Transportation Committee cleared the way for the pilot program Tuesday by deciding to hold onto a bill to impose speed limits on lakes around the state. Legislators and Safety Department officials said Wednesday that the move opened the door for the test program.

"That's the indication we need from the Legislature that we have the green light to put on the pilot program," said Earl Sweeney, assistant safety commissioner.

He said the experiment would let officials test radar on the water, see how expensive it would be to enforce speed limits and see how district courts would handle boating speeding tickets. At the end of the season, the department would tell legislators how the experiment worked out.

Winnipesaukee is the state's largest lake, and the areas around Bear and Rattlesnake islands are two of its most popular areas. Supporters of speed limits said a relatively small number of extremely fast boats is spoiling the lake for other users.

Rep. James Pilliod, sponsor of the statewide speed limit bill, decried the proposal to sidetrack it for more study and called the pilot program a joke.

Calling for more study is an old legislative trick for killing bills, he said, and, in this case, represents "a careful design, right from the first, of the sellers of large boats."

The House could ignore the recommendation for more study and pass the bill, said Pilliod, R-Belmont.

Last year, a similar bill Pilliod sponsored passed the House but failed in the Senate.

Angry speed-limit supporters petitioned for a hearing, which produced impassioned arguments on both sides last September.

Sweeney said waters around the two islands are good places to test speed limits because reasonable boaters "wouldn't think of going that fast in those areas."

Courts would determine fines for violators.
Becca is offline  
Old 03-22-2007, 01:45 PM   #2
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,859
Thanks: 236
Thanked 670 Times in 399 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Becca
Hi All,


Rep. James Pilliod, sponsor of the statewide speed limit bill, decried the proposal to sidetrack it for more study and called the pilot program a joke.

Calling for more study is an old legislative trick for killing bills, he said, and, in this case, represents "a careful design, right from the first, of the sellers of large boats."
This kind of talk, if accurately quoted, is not helping speed limit supporters. Mr. Pilliod makes it sound like studying something carefully before acting upon it is a bad idea. He apparently thinks everyone should take his words and opinions as gospel and pass the law, regardless of the need.

And to blame the sellers of large boats for orchestrating the study? I thought he disliked fast boats. Now he has a problem with large boats too? I know they can make big wakes, but The Mount, The Doris E and The Sophie C (probably the largest vessels on the lake, though there may be a Carver that's bigger than the two mailboats) are part of what gives the lake character, I'd hate to see them banned from the lake, due to their size, by the likes of Mr. Pilliod.
Dave R is offline  
Old 03-22-2007, 02:35 PM   #3
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,859
Thanks: 236
Thanked 670 Times in 399 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Becca
Sweeney said waters around the two islands are good places to test speed limits because reasonable boaters "wouldn't think of going that fast in those areas."
I think this makes perfect sense. Love to hear arguments for and against this particular statement.
Dave R is offline  
Old 03-22-2007, 02:59 PM   #4
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 900 Times in 509 Posts
Default

How will boaters know where the speed limits zones are?Will there be markers/bouys with speed limit signs on them like the no-wake zones?
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 03-22-2007, 05:27 PM   #5
Mee-n-Mac
Senior Member
 
Mee-n-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
Question The test zones

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave R
I think this makes perfect sense. Love to hear arguments for and against this particular statement.
I don't know that I would have chosen these 2 areas, as I understand them, as prime candidates. The Bear/mainland stretch has a NWZ at one end and a channel at the other and is short enough in between that it's no great loss and wouldn't be the "fast route" anyway. That said, it's not unsafe to be "fast" in that stretch so I wonder why, other than it makes a good test zone, it was choosen ? (I could float a good coonspiracy theory )

I'm not sure exactly what the area btw Rattlesnake and ??? is. Is it between R.I. and Sleepers I. or btw R. I. and the mainland, thus including all of Sleepers & Treasure ? Again I don't see "fast" as being inherently unsafe there, though, given you can go the alternate route (the Broads side of R.I.) I don't see it as a big deal in and of itself.

Lastly I do get a chuckle out of the statements made by various proponents in the articles Skip posted in the other thread. Doesn't Pilliod own a twin engine cruiser ? Must be a small one.
__________________
Mee'n'Mac
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH
Mee-n-Mac is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 03-22-2007, 05:32 PM   #6
Mee-n-Mac
Senior Member
 
Mee-n-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
Wink Study ... analysis ... phooey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave R
This kind of talk, if accurately quoted, is not helping speed limit supporters. Mr. Pilliod makes it sound like studying something carefully before acting upon it is a bad idea. He apparently thinks everyone should take his words and opinions as gospel and pass the law, regardless of the need.
{snip}
The study I'd like to see is the one that shows 45 and 25 to be the proper numbers for the proposed limits. Why aren't 25 and 5 the right numbers ? Or 66.6 and 31.4159 ....
__________________
Mee'n'Mac
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH
Mee-n-Mac is offline  
Old 03-22-2007, 06:10 PM   #7
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,926
Thanks: 1,347
Thanked 567 Times in 401 Posts
Exclamation Limits Should be 45.6 and 24.6 MPH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac
The study I'd like to see is the one that shows 45 and 25 to be the proper numbers for the proposed limits. Why aren't 25 and 5 the right numbers ? Or 66.6 and 31.4159 ....
"66.6" should bring up a question for us Winnipesaukee boaters.

The "NH Boating Accident Report - 2006" logged one crash listed as 36.6-MPH. How was that number arrived at?
__________________
It's not about your health.
ApS is offline  
Old 03-23-2007, 10:04 AM   #8
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,859
Thanks: 236
Thanked 670 Times in 399 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac
I don't know that I would have chosen these 2 areas, as I understand them, as prime candidates. The Bear/mainland stretch has a NWZ at one end and a channel at the other and is short enough in between that it's no great loss and wouldn't be the "fast route" anyway. That said, it's not unsafe to be "fast" in that stretch so I wonder why, other than it makes a good test zone, it was choosen ? (I could float a good coonspiracy theory )
I suspect the Bear Island route was choosen due to it's narrow end points, and it's high traffic on weekends. Ripping through there at high speeds on a Saturday afternoon is probably dumb. At its widest, just south of the PO and south to the red topped spar off Jerry Point, it's only about 1700 feet wide and that section is only about 2500 feet long. Then it necks down to 700 feet wide or so before it gets even narrower by FL3. There's also the fact that general boat traffic is going to make a beeline from one narrow point to the other in the 2500 foot stretch. Since ther's bi-driectional traffic, this rarely leaves room between northbound and southbound traffic for overtaking to port like we are supposed to. This means overtaking is generally going to happen to starboard which moves the fastest boats closest to the shore, not a good thing in my opinion.

I think the "Rattlesnake" area is really between Sleepers and the shoreline. That's a pretty busy area and there's boatloads of swimmers (literally ), WAM traffic and about 500 feet of navigable "channel" due to spars and the shape of the island and mainland. If that's not where they plan to have a speed limit, well I agree with you, it makes no sense.
Dave R is offline  
Old 03-23-2007, 01:53 PM   #9
Becca
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

SIKSUKR,

That was my questions also how do we know?
Becca is offline  
Old 03-23-2007, 08:40 PM   #10
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,945
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 221
Thanked 624 Times in 462 Posts
Default I volunteer!

Hey Marine Patrol, let me be your sign-guy over at buoy 3. For $1.25/hour, I will be happy to paddle my kayak back and forth from the Fl 3 buoy to Penney Island, maybe 100 yards(?), and hold up a 45mph/25mph sign to approaching boats. After dark, watch for me in the kayak with the kerosene hurricane lantern.

What to use for a sign? How about the big lid fom a 30 gal trash can and some white paint. It has a handle, and can be purchased from you-know where, and makes a good target, too.........yikes!

Last edited by fatlazyless; 03-23-2007 at 09:20 PM.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 03-23-2007, 09:07 PM   #11
Mee-n-Mac
Senior Member
 
Mee-n-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
Talking Hey, I got to thinking about this ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless
For $1.25/hour, I will be happy to paddle my kayak back and forth from the Fl 3 buoy to Penney Island, maybe 100 yards(?), and hold up a 45mph/25mph sign to approaching boats. After dark, watch for me in the kayak with the kerosene hurricane lantern.

What to use for a sign? How about the big lid fom a 30 gal trash can and some white paint. It has a handle, and can be purchased from you-know where, and makes a good target, too.........yikes!
Perhaps you could take this idea just a bit further. What you need is to get the State to pass a toll authorization bill for the Lake. Then you could set up a line across the channel. Hang a sign saying "Toll 25 cents". Upon paying you lower the line and allow the boat to pass. Accept the old tokens and I think the public will go along ! Mind you, I think the kayak might not be the ideal pursuit craft to capture the scofflaws, but I'm sure you'll figure something out.


Sign and waterproof paint = $1.97 @ Walmart
Nylon line with lead weights = $8.99 @ same
FLL in kayak being towed behind scofflaw cruiser by above line = priceless !
__________________
Mee'n'Mac
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH
Mee-n-Mac is offline  
Old 03-23-2007, 10:47 PM   #12
Mee-n-Mac
Senior Member
 
Mee-n-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
Lightbulb More on Zones

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave R
{snip} I think the "Rattlesnake" area is really between Sleepers and the shoreline. That's a pretty busy area and there's boatloads of swimmers (literally ), WAM traffic and about 500 feet of navigable "channel" due to spars and the shape of the island and mainland. If that's not where they plan to have a speed limit, well I agree with you, it makes no sense.
Sleepers to shore would make sense but why start (making sense) now ? If traffic were the prime concern I would have thought the area off the Weirs would have been a prime candidate. From FL44 to Eagle to Governors to Holts Pt (heck, I'll toss in everything to the bridge) to somewhere off the Weirs to Spindle Pt to FL44. Plus I have to believe that most of Rusty's complaining customers are really complaining about traffic in this area. Now I don't recall the last time I saw someone in excess of 45 mph in that area but like I said ... why start now.
__________________
Mee'n'Mac
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH
Mee-n-Mac is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 12:04 PM   #13
ghfromaltonbay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Clifton, NJ, Alton Bay
Posts: 769
Thanks: 204
Thanked 179 Times in 103 Posts
Default Alton Bay speed limit?

Having watched many a close call on weekends from the beach at Sandy Point, I would think that a 45 mph limit from Echo Point south to the NWZ would be a good test area. The channel past Sandy Point is like a mixing bowl on weekends. Add in the swim line at Sandy Point and you really narrow down that channel near FL23 during the prime boating season.
ghfromaltonbay is offline  
Old 03-24-2007, 12:43 PM   #14
Rayhunt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Gilford NH
Posts: 112
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

We all know why Bear island was chosen
Lets be realistic, these 2 are not the busiest of places. However they may show a good average density on the weekends. Why even have speed zones , just make them no wake zones and everyone will already know the rules.
Rayhunt is offline  
 

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 -4. The time now is 02:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.16803 seconds