Final Statements on HB-162

[webmaster]

HB-162 has been settled by the Senate.

To close out the HB-162 discussion I am going to allow each member a final closing statement in this thread.

I hope everyone who participated in this debate will take the time to make their final statements here. When activity in this thread stops the HB-162 threads will be permanently closed.

Don

[fatlazyless]

On the very same day, yesterday March 16, that the NH Senate voted to approve self-extinguishing cigarettes which go out when left unattended, it voted no to a 45-25 boat speed limit. Do you think that political contributions from the NH GoFast-BeLoud boat interests had much to do with the speed limit getting torpedoed?

Well, as Shakespeare wrote in Julius Caesar, 'beware the 15th & 16th of March, it could come back to haunt you!' So, for the NH Repubilcan Senators who voted no to a speed limit, they should consider what happened to Caesar, or something like that!

Meanwhile, boating season will be here soon, so boat safe and get out and enjoy the Big Lake, everyone.

[Ranger]

Once again facts outweigh emotion. NH is my kind of place.

[Dave R]

Thanks for letting us debate here Don!

[Winnipesaukee Divers]

Thank god it didn't pass... Not that I ever want to see what it's like to sail the Valkyrie at 60MPH or my 12' inflatable at that speed either, but isn't this the live free or die state? We (the people of the this great state) don't need anymore feel good laws that are un-enforceable.

I say, let the laws of physics prevail and rules of nature extract the penalty for stupidity. Besides, we need more good dive sites on the lake.

[KonaChick]

Don thank you for giving the lake winni community at large a place to voice their opinions on this subject. How hard was it not to press the delete button at times?? You did a fine job and deserve a round of applause!!

[jrc]

Don, Thanks for this wonderful site in general and specifically for letting us debate this issue.

Thanks to the debaters on both sides, you all made it interesting and informative.

Thanks to the NH Senate for closing the issue, at least for this year, so we can go enjoy the lake.

This season I will do my best to keep the lake safe and fun. I'll also be more observant, to better understand the concerns voiced here.

I predict this issue will return, hopefully we're all a little smarter then.

[ITD]

I think this issue has shown the need to stay vigilant and involved in the legislative process. To be honest when I first saw the bill I thought it had little chance to pass the house, boy was I wrong. I think the Senators saw the problems with this bill and that it did not solve most of the concerns detailed at the hearings. I applaud them for that and for not yielding to what was a determined press by the proponents of this bill.

I've owned property on this lake since 1999 and have been vacationing here for over 20 years. It is not as bad out there as it has been portrayed. Is it perfect? No, unfortunately there will always be troublemakers and accidents, but they are a small minority. Knee jerk reactions to accidents will not improve things. In the future, when bills like this are presented, there should be irrefutable proof that the bill is necessary and the constraints of the bill should properly address that proof, otherwise the bill should die. We should demand no less of our lawmakers for all new laws.

Thank you Don for opening this sub-forum and for keeping things under control. This site is an asset to the Lakes Region.

Finally, have YOU accepted the challenge? This site received much extra traffic due to the graciousness of Don, allowing this debate to happen. I felt the least I could do was help him defray the cost of that extra bandwidth used, how about you? Especially the prolific posters in this subforum.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=2947

[Excalibur]

This has been a great place to see whats happening at my favorite summer place.

Thank you for a very imformative forum.

[Woodsy]

Don...

Thanks for letting us debate. Although the debate was contentious at times, these type of debates about personal freedoms usually are. I appreciate your patience with all of us! True to your word, you stayed impartial on the forum throughout this long slow process. If we get a chance to meet, I would like the opportunity to buy you a drink and shake your hand. Good Job!

HB-162 didn't pass this time, and I have no doubt it will be brought up again, probably sooner than I would like. However, I wouldn't say that HB-162 was unsuccessful. HB-162 succeeded in putting a spotlight on the issues facing Lake Winnipesaukee. HB-162 brought out the best and the worst in people on both sides of the debate, myself included. This was a great debate, probably one for the ages!

HB-162 has resulted in a marked change for the better. The results of the hearings and the debate on this forum have been very positive for Lake Winnipesaukee as well as other NH waterways. There is new legislation pending that will address some of the issues such as: boat noise, more funding for the NHMP, tightening up of BSC requirements, and few other rules that will make the lake safer for all. I was informed the other day that there will be new signage at the public launches to inform daytrippers of the 150’ Safe Passage Rule and that a Safe Boating Certificate is required (Lack of signage was one of my biggest pet peeves).

We heard all sorts of stories from both sides. I personally learned a lot about how people perceive me, and my choice of boat. I am not a rowdy, drunken cowboy who thinks the lake is my personal playground. I am going to do everything I can to change that perception. The Hi-Performance boating community is a small one, and we need to be self-policing. I think all of the Hi-Performance boaters have been put on notice that they need to be better neighbors. Slowing down a bit and changing course when near other boats (regardless of 150'), making sure the other boater know you saw them, perhaps even a friendly wave might help.

The passion involved in this debate was truly inspiring. I think everyone agreed we needed to make some changes. We just disagreed on how to go about it. Tolerance and respect for others will need to be practiced. I hope with this issue behind us, (even if it is only temporarily) we can all work together to effect a positive change that allows everyone to enjoy the beauty of Lake Winnipesaukee safely.

Woodsy

[Rayhunt]

I was and still are COMPLETELY shocked and baffled at the arguments for this law.. Winni is HUGE
Yes there are a few areas that always get crazy on the weekends.
There are many laws already in place that adequately cover the issues.
Id like to see some expanded no wake zones.
But a 45 mph speed limit on the broads ??? Ridiculous !
Maybe it was the "unintended consequences" That really opened my eyes.
Is it really just a rouge to scare a few visitors away from YOUR lake.
I will not forget
I should say nice fight and reach across the isle for a peck on the cheek
But im just not that type of person

[pm203]

The majority of voters did not want a speed limit. The Senate was smart enough to analyze the data and the facts and make the the only ethical decision they could. Passing this law would have been a discriminatory act against a very small percentage of performance boaters, and that is not only right it,s not the American way.
I have spent alot of money and gone through great lenghts to make my boat meet all the required decibel levels. I am courteous and I do my best to abide by all of the lakes rules and regulations. Will I go 90 mph once in a while? You bet. But keep in mind that most of the time, I will just cruise at a much slower speed and enjoy the beauty of this lake.
Thank you Senate for doing the right thing!!

[Seaplane Pilot]

Thank you to the 15 Senators that made their decision based on facts, not fear. After learning of the vote yesterday, I heard on the radio that the Liberal Massachusetts legislature is considering a ban on cell phone use in cars. More fear mongers and money grabbers at work - I hope they stay down there and let us Live Free or Die up here. It's a great day to live in NH.

[Cal]

My boat cruises very nicely at 3000 rpms , which equates to 50 mph. Im sure glad NH isn't making me a criminal for doing this. I am very aware of the 150' rule and exactly what 150' really is since I'm lucky enough to have 150' deep property and a clear shot front to back in one area and always check to refresh my mind what 150' is.
I feel some good will come from all this , in that we all know eyes will be on us.
Everyone have a safe summer season

[Weirs guy]

Don, thank you.

To the rest of us, do as you will as long as nobody else gets hurt, and live free or die.

[Evenstar]

This forum is like the lake – mostly full of powerboaters, so I have felt rather out numbered, being that I’m one of the few serious paddlers who posts here.

So my perspective is different from the majority. But I’m used to that. The problem is that some people can’t seem to have a debate without getting personal. Many of my posts were picked apart, and I have been constantly misquoted. There have been posts made just to poke fun at me or to insult my abilities, my skills, or my intelligence (“Did they lower the bar for acceptance at UNH?”).

I’ve tried to patiently explain what a sea kayak is – with the response being that “it’s still just a kayak”. I’ve been told that kayaks are just toys and that they have no business being out on the main lake. I’ve been told that I should stick to ponds. I’ve tried to explain that my experience is mostly on other large NH lakes (which would also be affected by HB 162), and have been told that I don’t have the experience to tell if a lake is safe for me. I’ve been told that my fears are unfounded, or that I’m exaggerating them. I’ve even been accused of lying.

There are some really nice people here, but I’ve about had it with the others.

I also feel like 15 of my senators betrayed us (smaller, slower boaters), by not supporting HB 162. I just think that it’s wrong to allow boats to go just as fast as they want and just dismiss the affect that action is having on others. Or to use the excuse that they felt like this law would be unenforceable. (We still have highway speed laws, even though many people still speed.) Or to say that congestion is the problem. (But aren’t congestion and the need for speed limits related?)

A lake is for recreation – it’s not a high speed transportation system. And it’s not a race course. It’s really hard to relax much and have fun, when you spend much of your boating time being concerned about your personal safety. How do I tell the speeding boats that don’t see me from the ones who are just having fun trying to scare me? (and often succeeding.)

I believe in freedom too, but we have laws mainly because everyone's right to liberty ends where it intrudes on someone else's liberty. We wouldn’t need most of our laws if everyone was truly concerned with (and understood) how their actions affect others. But unfortunately some people don’t really care (or truly understand) how their actions (and their words) affect others.

[SIKSUKR]

First of all I would also like to give a big shout out to Don for creating a sub thread while grinding his teeth together reading some of the inflammatory veiws on both sides.You are the man!!Second I must praise the opponents of hb162 for not gloating in their success(so far).If I remember correctly there was a lot of that gloating after the legislature first passed the bill.This has reassured my conviction on this matter that for the most part,the opponents of hb162 are good spirited,well educated,reasonable people.Some people might say I'm not one of them though.I beg to differ.I've actually learned a lot about the quality of the forum members and I am truely impressed.We have some very well spoken,deep thinkers here folks.So all in all,Im taking more away from this whole debate than us against you and which way the final vote went.Congratulations everyone!!

[Airwaves]

I just want to say to EVERYONE ON BOTH SIDES how much I enjoyed reading the posts and participating in the debate.

I have learned from this group (both sides) and I appreciate that fact.

To Don,
Thanks for showing patience.

[jeffk]

I too am glad that my occasional jaunts at 55 MPH, when conditions permit, have not been criminalized. I hope we can work together to find solutions for the problems that were called out at the hearings for this bill. In general, courtesy, education, and enforcement of existing laws can address most of the boating problems at the lake. I plan to continue working to call boaters attention to the existing rules and regulations and to stress the need to be considerate of other boaters. I hope all the people who were so passionate about this issue, on both sides, will take up the challenge to actively work on improving conditions now, not just wait for the issue to reach a boil again.

[B R]

Thank you Don for allowing the debate to take place. You showed true character with your patience.

Thank you Woodsy for all your effort and time. You were the persistent voice of reason when there was so much fear in these threads.

Thank you Senators for looking at this law from a fact versus fear perspective.

[chipj29]

First of all, thanks to Don for providing the site. Secondly, thanks to all of you for your opinions. It is nice to hear all sides of an issue, one that is so near and dear to all of us. And thanks to most of you for keeping it civil.
Personally I was against HB162, because I feel it infringes on our freedoms, and also because it would have made me a criminal to go WOT on my jet ski. Even though it barely breaks 50, I don't think it is dangerous, or that I am a dangerous rider, and I especially feel that people that are on the water near me are not in fear of me. I keep my head on a swivel at all times, and I know where you are. And I stay 150'+++ away, no matter if I am stand on vessel or not. I know the rules of the water...does the other guy? Maybe not, so I stay away.

I hope you all have a great summer and enjoy your time on the water, whatever body of water that may be.

Chip

[GWC...]

Life in the doghouse....

Appreciate the Webmaster's tolerance of untold flak as a result of my passionate expression of my position regarding HB162. Yes. I made the "bad boys" list and consequently the Webmaster has had the extra task of monitoring my posts before being uploaded for viewing (reading) by forum visitors. So, while gathering some pennies, nickels, and dimes to offset the extra bandwidth and scrutiny time, I keep hearing voices in my head singing, "Bad boys, bad boys, what ya gonna type?" Guess I have enjoyed too many happy years at the Lake utilizing a variety of float-me vessels that include paddling a wakeboard, paddling a canoe, enjoying a sail in the Broads to the thrills of Mother Nature on a Sunfish, putt-putting through the Weirs channel on a Wet Bike - only took ten minutes to get in line from Thurston's, to powering a sistership of the 1963 winner of the Cowes Classic at a slow speed, only one engine engaged, to enjoy the enthrallment of the Loons and other members of Mother Nature's tribe of critters. With all these joyous experiences and memories, I let the fear factor by the opponents get the better of me. Two things I despise - someone who will steal from me and someone who will misrepresent the truth to me. Everyone else I am able to tolerate, maybe not always happily; but still able to tolerate, just the same.

We were asked not to mention posters in this response (Please limit your comments to the speed limit issue and do not make comments about or directed at other members that might require a response.), so I shall not, even though one used a reference to wordage in one of my posts.

In closing, "Thank you" again with much appreciation to the Webmaster for his tolerance. I sincerely hope everyone on both sides of the HB162 issue is able to enjoy the Lake and all the beauty it bestows upon its visitors, be they residents or not, for we are all just visitors who one day will pass on and our place in a serendipitous setting we call the Lake will be enjoyed by another.

[upthesaukee]

Don, thanks for your patience and bending of your normal guidelines to allow those folks who wanted to express an opinion to do so.

Hopefully, as was said in at least one other thread, we have all learned something, can go forward with a new understanding of how others feel, and make the lake a more enjoyable place for all.

[Silver Duck]

If nothing else, the debate over HB-162 should at least have made those of us with larger, faster boats aware of how intimidating we can be to smaller boats, even given compliance with the 150 foot safe passage requirement.

I will definitely be more aware of the "fear factor" in the coming seasons, and make certain that I show my awareness of a small boat's presence, somehow.

On another note, given the vehemence shown by some of the proponents, I doubt that this will be the end of their attempt to rid Winnipesaukee of performance boats. But, I do want to thank WinnFabs for providing a ready-made list of commercial supporters of their attempt; given any viable alternative, I will definitely be avoiding those businesses!

I, too, would like to thank Don for his patience with the debate and the extra work that I'm sure he put in to keep it under control!

Silver Duck

[JDeere]

I firmly believe that a speed limit will come to the big lake and the only question is when. The majority of NH voters were in favor of the speed limit and that is not going to change. The supporters of the speed limit are already generating plans to being a new process to bring about necessary change.

It is ironic to me that the so many of the anti- speed limit people us the phrase “live free or die” as a reason that NH should not impose a speed limit. Yet the majority of folks who are concerned for their safety when there are on the lake are using the same motto to describe their sentiments since they want to be free to use the lake with fear. Fear by the way is defined as feeling of agitation and anxiety caused by the presence or imminence of danger. It is absolutely realistic and reasonable to fear some of the boaters on the lake regardless of speed BUT when you add the speed to the equation a reasonable person will be afraid when passed by someone traveling at 60 MPH+++ and if you are very lucky they are 150 feet away.

So, the speed limit will come and I predict it will be within the next 5 years. Hopefully that change will take place because common sense prevailed but most likely it will come about after a spectacular crash and fatalities. With the congestion on the lake and the size and speed of the boats a spectacular crash is coming and it will be a result of SPEED.

I watched a high performance boat making high speed turns……………oops he lost control and next thing you know there is fiberglass tearing of the boat. People are ok but boats sinks. Not a result of speed?? Nah just boater inattention, inexperience etc….yah right!

A special thank you to Don for allowing all of us one final opportunity to pontificate on the speed limit issue.

[Skip]

....except a sincere "thank you Don"

Once again you provided an invaluable resource for people of the Lakes Region (or visitors that call it home in their camps or their hearts) at much personal sacrifice of your own personal familytime & expertise.

And lest I forget, thank you readers for the financial support you gave to the site during this debate. I know that all of you that post or read here profusely gave what you could!

And finally, whenever one of you see a Marine Patrol Officer out there this summer, if ashore shake their hand and when abroad give'em a big smile & wave. We have only increased the burden on this already shorthanded agency with the supplemental safety demands we made during this spirited debate. Let's do everything in our power to make their job easier, safer and maybe a little less stressful!

'Nuff said, c'mon ice-out!

Skip

[Island Lover]

If this precess brought attention on the lakes problems and made it just a little bit safer, then it was worthwhile.

My concern was never so much for the way the lake is, but for what it will become in future years.

Things never stay the same, the lakes problems will either get better or worse. If they improve that will be great. If they go down hill then we will again see speed or horsepower limit legislation.

And if there is a serious accident involving speed in the next few years, the press will be all over it. There will not be a big debate in that situation, it will just pass.

[islandAl]

It has been great reading from both sides.
1. I do not have a "GFBL" but am capable of going faster than proposed speed and sometimes, when the conditions are right, really enjoy it.
2. Many times I read references to the like of highways have speed limits, true But most also ban slow moving vehicles or have a minimum speed
3. I understand that the original and after the change, some senators wanted to change back to Winni only. Seems the opposite should happen if anything.
4. Read about how congested the lake is and that folks are staying away in large numbers because of the "fear" of speeding boats. If they all came back, there would be no room to go over headway speed.
5. When you can travel for miles without being within one mile of land in any direction, you are "offshore"
6. Been boating on Winni for over 50 years and have seen lots of changes. Besides sometimes going fast, I also like to Canoe.
7. Have not yet been threatened by a boat going faster than proposed limits but have been by those not knowing the rules and showing common courtesy
8. Hope a speed limit never passes on Winni.

[Quilt Lady]

First, a big "thank you" to Webmaster Don for providing a separate space for this discussion.

Second, if the discussion has done anything it has brought to people's attention how others see and feel about what is happening out on the lake. If we can all show some common courtesy to others, follow the rules already in place and try to enlighten those who misbehave, we will all be better off.

Lastly, to the GFBL boaters- I think that you,as a group, would be better received if you would please keep your mufflers engaged, especially at night. We all come to the lake for the peace and beauty of this place. To be awakened in the wee hours of the morning by a fast moving, unmuffled engine is not pleasant or peaceful. The sound carries very far and echos off of the mountains. If you know of some one who is making this kind of noise, would you please take them behind the boathouse and give them a good "enlightening". Thank you.

[Bear Lover]

I think some kind of speed limit will come eventually. Three Senators voting the other way would have changed the outcome, thats a close call.

There is a safety issue that is more critical than speed. To many people are getting onto the lake that don't know and don't care what the rules are. An idiot can rent or buy a boat and not have any idea how to operate it or what the regulations are.

Tightening up boater certification is a good idea. And the marinas need to take more responsibility about who they send out on the lake. A restaurant is held responsible if they let someone drink and drive. A marina should be responsible when they just run a credit card, untie the bow line and give a shove.

This is one point that all sides have agreed on in this discussion.

[Cobalt]

Bear Lover you make a great point. Many of the marinas in favor of the speed limits have no problems renting underpowered pontoon or small fishing boats to novice boaters with no knowledge of the lake. With a new map in hand, these individuals attempt to navigate the lake, in any conditions, in boats that are barely sea worthy. It's all about the $$$.

I do not own a go-fast boat. If those in favor of speed limits on the water believe that a majority of NH voters want speed limits and should rule, then those voters should be limited to registered boat owners in NH and not include anyone who needs a road map to find Lake Winnipesaukee.

[Lakegeezer]

First, thanks to Don for reconsidering his ban on the discussion of this topic and then finding a perfect way to allow discussion without damaging the spirit of the overall forum. Don, you are a great forum moderator and Webmaster.

My 10 final thoughts....

1) There is not a problem with speed; there is a problem with courtesy.

2) Some people's pursuit of happiness involves speeding on the water. Most do it safely. Just because you don't understand or agree with their point of view doesn't make it proper for you to infringe on their right to pursue happiness as they see fit - especially if what they are doing is not physically injuring innocent people or property.

3) Those who enjoy slower craft, and I am one (kayak and sailboat), need to understand that Winnipesaukee is a big lake, with big fast boats. That is part of the challenge, and fun. Slow and fast craft can coexist, but each must recognize the other exist and compensate. Winnipesaukee is not the ocean, but it is not a quiet pond either. If you are in a big fast boat, you have to be extra careful that you don’t run into small slow craft – they WILL be there. If you are in a small or slow boat – you have to be extra careful to be seen by a large fast boat – because they WILL be there.

4) Lake Winnipesaukee covers 72 square miles. Some parts are more congested than other parts. Even the congested parts only experience overcrowding a few hours a day on maybe 10 weekends a year. Any future calls for laws should focus on the congestion issue, and not treat the whole lake (or all the lakes in the state) as one problem.

5) Overcrowding around the lake is a problem. The lake's region has already been overbuilt and new construction projects are still being proposed. Those that choose to live and boat on Lake Winnipesaukee must do so with the understanding that it is, at times, a crowded lake, not Golden Pond. Zoning which would address more overcrowding could help the long term problem. If more dense housing projects are built (condos and townhouse projects especially) – the lake will become more crowded, and the problems of boating will get worse. The root cause needs to be addressed.

6) The NH legislature disappoints me. Especially the house. This bill was so flawed, and based on more emotional than logical arguments, that it should have never made it out of its first committee. It scares me how powerful a political action committee can be in pushing an agenda based on flawed logic and emotion. One has to wonder how many other laws have come about this way. I have a boat that struggles to hit 45, so the law wouldn’t have greatly impacted me personally, but it was an honor to fight against an inappropriate attempt to take away yet another freedom.

7) We do not need a police state on the lake or strive for zero tolerance. Maybe those in the congested areas should take up a collection and hire an off-duty police officer to sit in the trouble spots on weekends. Overall – minor infractions should be ignored. Its a recreational area afterall. More people die on Lake Winnipesaukee, every year, in snowmobile accidents than in boats. The lake is a very safe place for the boating public. Stop making it seem dangerous.

8) We need to fight against fear. Fear that you will be run over by another boat is just that – fear. Accidents happen – but are very rare. The cases we can recall were due to negligent acts, already against the law. Laws designed to reduce fearful situations restrict the freedoms of those who are less afraid. If you are afraid of something, work on your fear or avoid the situation that makes you fearful – do not try to pass a law. Not everyone has the same level of fear. Go boating in the morning before 10, or in the evening after 6. Live within your ability to deal with the environment as it is - don’t try to change the environment in a way that infringes on others. Fear almost won this time. Thank goodness the law failed.

9) Education is good. Let others know how you feel. I am concerned about the lake water quality and shore erosion. I’d like everyone to be aware of the problem, and know what actions cause it. Focus on eduction, enter into dialog – make others aware and hope they take the appropriate action.

10) This is not the only case where we have to be vigilant. This speed bill may come around again - but there also are other concerns. Laws against rafting, water-skiing and ski-craft are being passed. We are seeing the same kind of political-action-committee approach to restricting parts of the lake to certain activities as we saw with the speed limit bill. These are selfish laws that benefit a small group of people, at the expense of others. Each restriction concentrates activities into fewer areas, rather than sharing the load across the whole lake.

[Islander]

The point about boater education is a good one. Its not only marinas that are doing this. Several PWC rental outfits will meet you at the ramp and rent without any training or education. I have personally done this and they never asked to see my boating education certificate. They were only interested in getting the money and making sure I would pay for any damage. They don't even give you a chart.

If both sides agree that boater education is key, then they should come together now and do something about it. A joint resolution or statement by WinnFABS and NHRBA would be a powerful message to legislators, the Marine Patrol and boat renters.

If BOTH sides can agree on how to tighten up boater education it would be very hard to ignore.

[SAMIAM]

Good to see that our elected officials showed some good yankee common sense.The folks that sponsored HB 162 worked hard and had every good intention and I respect their effort.I think,if nothing else,they got everyones attention and I think our lakes will be a better place because of it.

[secondcurve]

I agree that the speed law was not the answer. If we truly want to make the lake a safer place, I think the following would get there a lot quicker than a speed limit:

1) Eliminate all alcohol on boats. It isn't allowed in cars, so why should it be allowed on boats? Make the penalties for having booze on boats extremely tough and make the failure to comply hit an operator's driving record;

2) Eliminate the ability of a boat renter to obtain a valid operator's permit at the desk of a boat rental provider. Make all new boaters take classroom training to obtain a valid operator's license;

If we took these simple actions, 95% of the problems on the lake would disappear immediately.

[BroadHopper]

This was quite an experience to me. This helps me learn a little about out state's politics and this is the first time I was actually involve in communcating my thoughts to the representatives and Senators. An eye opener for sure. I was hoping HB62 will survive less the 45/25 rule. The rest of the bill has merits.
What I am surprised is that technically, nothing was gained. No new rules and no additional fundings for the marine patrol. But it did arouse public awareness that there is a problem with lack of respect for the law and lack of common courtesy. Something that is sourly needed as the lake become congested.
I'm all for giving up my gas refund if the money goes to the marine patrol. NH politics being as it is, I don't think that will ever happen.
Thank you Don for allowing us to show how we truly love the lake. Sorry I got a little 'emotional'. I lived on this lake all my life and I would like to continue living and die on this lake with respect.

[ApS]

My Senator (Kenney) voted in favor of the bill -- reluctantly -- while saying, "This problem isn't going away". Agreed: Not for "us", not for "them", and not for Don.

While the bill didn't "ban" specific boats as claimed, three Eastern states have prepared legislation that will. The handwriting is on the wall; however, the good news is that a nighttime speed limit has garnered wide support—even at a certain "non-PC" website frequented by GFBLs.

As usual, debates are a good thing, and some thoughts need expanding:
1) Even NH mandates PFDs on children, but how effective are PFDs at 45+ speeds?

2) Radar does work on water, but we wouldn't have known that from the debate—here—just a year ago!

3) LFOD is still being tested today by "the freedom to smoke tobacco anywhere I want", "the freedom to 'skim' my snowmobile irrespective of the dangers to rescuers", and "the freedom to steer my car from the passenger footwell if I'm knocked off the roadway by another vehicle".

4) The Coast Guard's accident statistics are still going down, but did anyone research to see what they were before the advent of the Jet-Ski?

Upon their introduction, Jet-Skis established a new high-water mark for boating disaster. Jet-Skier "Education" has likely accounted for the glacial downward trend in all boating statistics. (Except for New Jersey and Connecticut's educational schemes where they are heading back up).

5) As the owner and sometimes passenger of several GSBQ (Going Slow, Being Quiet) boats, there are just too many occasions where a careless moment becomes an inconvenience for one—and a "lifetime disaster" for another. Perhaps when the MPs get their website ready (still under construction last week), all of us will get an insight into what really is going on "out there", and not have to rely on the scattered reporters of just two newspapers.

6) As the third generation of my family to live on Winnipesaukee, I wish I could enjoy the lake as my predecessors had. (We never said, "use" the lake).

Things have changed of course: Boats are made of plastic now, and there's a "bumper-car mentality" that didn't exist when you made your own boat of cedar, mahogany, oak, and molded birch plywood. Fiberglass boats can take a beating, and spring back into shape--sorta. Wood boats, you protected with hyper-vigilance.

Everything is bigger—mansions, gas-consumption, outdoor lighting, PWCs, "graphics", egos, boats, trailers, and the vehicles used to tow them. This year's boat offerings will feature more size, speed, and even-more powerful engines. Unless gasoline hits $10 a gallon (and it's being talked about), this size and power trend will grind into the concerns for our protected waters.

7) In Wolfeboro, Goodhue and Hawkins is now building an immense boat storage warehouse; so don't expect the problem to go away on the "quiet side" of the lake, either.

If nothing else, some targeted boaters now know that they are "on Winnipesaukee probation". Senator Kenney, though officially on the fence, has certainly been made more aware.

A tip-o'-the-hat to Don for enabling the sharing of all of the concepts of what Lake Winnipesaukee should become.

[Jan]

Now that the dust has settled I would also like to have a last word and say thanks to the webmaster for putting up with all this.

The current fight is over and I can live with the result. You win some and you lose some and new laws like this often have trouble the first time around.

Although it failed in the senate it was clear to me that there was widespread support for a speed limit. The favorable percentages in the only statewide poll that I saw seemed to be backed up by the vote in the house. Even the small poll on this forum had a majority favoring some speed limit. The law only ran into trouble in the senate where it failed along party lines. I heard that the governor was prepared to sign it.

I think the movement towards reasonable speed limits on Winni has just begun. As high performance boats get faster, more powerful and more numerous some restrictions seem inevitable. The opponents of speed limits managed to stop the first wave but they may not be able to stop the tide.

That's all.

J

[bbarrell]

I've never posted here before but have been reading many of the comments. The decision has been made, no speed limits on large NH lakes. I am glad for this. There simply are no facts based on a need for them today. Though my boat doesn't go over 65mph, I enjoy driving it at that speed when there aren't alot of boats around and it's safe. I don't believe there are 'tons' of boats racing around the lake at 90mph causing havoc, actually few boats go that speed. I've witnessed no accidents related to speed but at least 5 with boats docking or traveling under 10 mph in the channel. I know because I'm on the lake almost daily from May-Oct and have been coming here for 30 years. I own lakefront property and my taxes are quite high enough...don't need useless laws added to the books to increase them.

There are several real issues on the lake (noise, congestion, etc) that we could all work together to really make a difference on. Everybody wants to share the lake and make it a safe place for everyone. HB162 just was not the way to do that.

Much time and money has been spent on this and I'm sure the government has no intention of entertaining an instant replay of it. But if all groups worked together we might be able to come to agreements on certain things that could make everyone happy?

I've learned alot about the legislative process and intend to stay on top of all lake bills in the future. At a minimum, as others have mentioned, this brought alot of awareness to NH lakes concerning current rules and consideration for others....and a little education + driver courtesy goes a long way!

See ya on the lake!

[Skipper of the Sea Que]

I am glad that HB 162 did NOT pass. Boater education and more strict enforcement of the current rules are the answers. That does not mean that I think that ANY speed is OK. My opinion is that 45/25 mph is not the problem solver. We should finish implementation of the current (or slightly modified) Boater Education Certification process and then evaluate the situation before adding more speed regulations. Maybe add a vision check as they do for a driver's license.

Everyone should boat as if the Marine Patrol is always watching us. We’ve all seen the boaters who behave well when Marine Patrol is in sight but as soon as the MP is gone, their compliance with the rules change (for instance, 150’ shrinks considerably). That’s not going to be fixed by adding 45/25 mph speed limits or by safe boating education. What will help is increased enforcement. We’ve seen similar behavior on the highways. Maybe we should think about Unmarked Marine Patrol boats.

I echo the comments of most of the above posts from those who were opposed to HB 162. I also recognize the concerns of those who were in favor of HB 162 even though I disagree with many of their perceptions. We are all entitled to our opinion and to be heard. And, in this country, you have the Right to be Wrong!

Seriously though, most everything about HB 162 has already been said. May HB 162 R.I.P.

BTW: My boat is not able to reach 45 mph.

Thank you Webmaster Don for providing (and watching over) this discussion and for the great web site.

More boater education. More enforcement of the current boating rules. Common sense, courtesy and enjoyment for all.