More financial pressure on the NH Marine Patrol

[Airwaves]

Just ahead, more financial pressure on the Marine Patrol and given the way they are funded something is going to have to give.

First there is the possibility of this unnecessary speed limit bill that will do nothing to make Lake Winnipesaukee safer but could possibly make the lake a less safe place to boat and swim because manpower will have to be diverted, becoming law. Now Homeland Security has come up with a strategy for recreational boats, to be developed and enforced by the states making recreational boaters the “Neighborhood Crime Watch” of the water.

“Officials today were to announce a plan calling on states to develop and enforce safety standards for recreational boaters and asking boaters to look for and report suspicious behavior on the water - much like a neighborhood watch program.”

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...y_for_boaters/

How will this impact Lake Winnipesaukee, after all there are no tankers etc plying our waters?

Manpower will have to be deployed to target marinas along the coast and where do you think they are going to get the additional manpower from? Winnipesaukee has the largest concentration of MP Officers in the state so that’s where they’ll get them.

So, a reduction in safety patrols to establish radar posts, and now the likelihood that Marine Patrol boats and crews will be needed along the seacoast. These don’t look like ways to keep Lake Winnipesaukee safe to me!

[Woodsy]

Airwaves...

I totally agree with you! I have been writing about the COST of HB-847 since its inception! The proponents keep saying HB-847 costs nothing, when in fact that is an absolute unabashed falsehood!

1. Radar Certification Costs: There will be a cost to have the NHMP Officers Radar Certified! A key provision of HB-847 is that a speeding violation will affect your driver's license. There is a HUGE difference between Radar Trained and Radar Certified! A Radar Certification is REQUIRED in order for the officer to testify in court. The NHMP will need to send some officers to attend the radar class @ NHSP Academy. This will cost some $$$.

2. NHMP Resource Costs: The NHMP testified at the House Committee hearing in Franklin, and stated quite clearly in the Boat Speed Report that safety dictates that 2 NHMP officers be assigned to a boat on a radar patrol. This is another drain on NHMP resources... instead of 2 officers in 2 patrol boats you have 2 officers in 1 patrol boat. Which is the better use of the limited NHMP resources? The NHMP testimony agreed with the House Committee that this was EXPENSIVE!

3. Court Costs: Because a boat speeding ticket can possibly affect your drivers license, most people will fight the boat speeding ticket and this will require the NHMP officer to testify in court. This will cost the NH Courts both time and money, sucking up court resources and it will cost the NHMP time & money, taking an officer off the lake to testify in court!

4. Enforcability: The NHMP testified at the House Committee hearing in Franklin, that while the outcome of the Boat Speed Study was that radar did work on the water, it worked only in certain situations, and there was a concern about meeting the Burden Of Proof in court!

Make no mistake, there is definitely a COST associated with HB-847. The current state of the economy coupled with the high cost of gas will no doubt have a negative input on boat registrations. This in turn will have a negative impact on the NHMP budget. HB-847 asks the NHMP to do ALOT more with ALOT less money!

Given the current state of the economy, do we really want to enact a rule that makes ANYONE take thier boat elswhere?

Woodsy

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Airwaves...

Given the current state of the economy, do we really want to enact a rule that makes ANYONE take thier boat elswhere?

Woodsy

In the case of BI.............probably so

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

"...Manpower will have to be deployed to target marinas along the coast and where do you think they are going to get the additional manpower from? Winnipesaukee has the largest concentration of MP Officers in the state so that’s where they’ll get them..."

Now is the time to take the Homeland Security Federal funding (that you forgot to mention) and merge the State Police and NHMP to provide a cadre of professional "sworn" officers to patrol the lakes in-season, while providing a larger State Police presence for highways on the off-season.

Originally Posted by Airwaves

"...These don’t look like ways to keep Lake Winnipesaukee safe to me...!"

Lake Winnipesaukee has become dangerous?

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Lake Winnipesaukee has become dangerous?

According to all the speed limit supporters, the answer to that question would be YES!!

[Bear Islander]

WOW! You people are getting desperate!

The White House is worried about nuclear or biological attacks on our cities by small boat. However the only part of that scenario that interests you is how it might effect speed limits on lake Winnipesaukee!

GET A CLUE!

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by APS
Now is the time to take the Homeland Security Federal funding (that you forgot to mention) and merge the State Police and NHMP to provide a cadre of professional "sworn" officers to patrol the lakes in-season, while providing a larger State Police presence for highways on the off-season.

I didn't see anything in the article that even hinted that Homeland Security was providing funding for this, as a matter of fact if you look at the allocation of money the funds available to first responders have been slowly reduced over the past.

I advocated for the merger of the State Police and NHMP a long time ago as a way to maintain a fulltime professional force but it was pooh poohed by most on the forum and if that is an indicator of public sentiment in NH then I would say it's something that won't happen any time soon.

Originally posted by Bear Islander
WOW! You people are getting desperate!

The White House is worried about nuclear or biological attacks on our cities by small boat. However the only part of that scenario that interests you is how it might effect speed limits on lake Winnipesaukee!

GET A CLUE!

Correct me if I am wrong but this entire forum is about Lake Winnipesaukee and since this initiative is likely to draw Marine Patrol manpower away from the duties they currently perform, coupled with additional duties created by this silly speed limit bill, there will be an issue with Marine Patrol being able to fulfill their mission on Lake Winnipesaukee without new funding sources (taxes)...but then again you believe everything the Marine Patrol does is at no cost, right?

Originally posted by APS
Lake Winnipesaukee has become dangerous?

I didn't say Lake Winnipesaukee has become dangerous, I said these measures are not a way to KEEP LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE SAFE!

So now the Marine Patrol is facing a financial assault on three fronts,
1. Expected funding cuts (even level funding is a cut because of rising prices)
2. Additional costs associated with HB847
3. Additional costs associated with HLS "Neighborhood Crime Watch of the water"

[fatlazyless]

As HB 847 is proposed, it will expire in two years so that makes it a trial or a test run. It starts on January 1, 2009, and it expires on January 1, 2011. It's not cast in concrete and being presented as a law that will be forever. It's a two year trial run. If passed, we give it a go for two years and then the legislature gets to reconsider it. If it does get passed then in two years the Marine Patrol will have that speed limit, enforcement experience for the legislature to consider.

Better to be safe, than to be sorry!


ps...my no gasoline, no annual registration needed, sailboat, is still for sale at a very reasonable price, so buy now(!) before I am forced to raise the selling price to accomodate high cost of gasoline! Methinks I will be very sorry I sold it.

[CanisLupusArctos]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

If it does get passed then in two years the Marine Patrol will have that speed limit, enforcement experience for the legislature to consider.

At the rate things are going, by that time, oil will be so expensive that no one will be speeding around the lake except a handful of oil company execs as they try to outrun the bullets, flamethrowers, molitove cocktails, blow darts, spears, and Chinese throwing stars from the general population.

The rest of us will have retrofitted our boats to gerbil power. The state will forget all about speed limits and instead enact laws against using wild squirrels instead of gerbils. Cabin cruisers will require humans on treadmills. Cigarette boats will require teams of slaves with oars, driven by the drum beat of a sadistic leather-clad bald guy at the stern.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by FLLAs HB 847 is proposed, it will expire in two years so that makes it a trial or a test run. It starts on January 1, 2009, and it expires on January 1, 2011. It's not cast in concrete and being presented as a law that will be forever. It's a two year trial run.

Better than that, since this is the first summer that all powerboat operators need a safe boating certificate to operate a boat in NH, how about we give THAT a 2 year trial before imposing new laws that research shows are not necessary and will only make the lake less safe than it is right now!

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

As HB 847 is proposed, it will expire in two years so that makes it a trial or a test run. It starts on January 1, 2009, and it expires on January 1, 2011. It's not cast in concrete and being presented as a law that will be forever. It's a two year trial run. If passed, we give it a go for two years and then the legislature gets to reconsider it. If it does get passed then in two years the Marine Patrol will have that speed limit, enforcement experience for the legislature to consider.

What are the benchmarks going to be? If statistics show that "speeding" is not a problem now, what will show that the new law was effective? It is not possible for the number of high-speed accidents to go down, since there have been none in recent years.

[Airwaves]

If the speed limit bill becomes law I predict that this will be the spin from the Solution in Search of a Problem Crowd no matter what happens when the hearings are held in 2011 to decide to make the it permanent.

Spin 1., A few boats are caught doing over 45....Spin....SEE! We needed the speed limits after all!

Spin 2., No one is caught going over 45.....Spin....SEE! The speed limit bill worked!

Of course it doesn't matter that less that 1 percent of boats clocked by radar exceeded 45mph during the Marine Patrol test period, its the SPIN that matters!

That Spin-O-Meter will be moving so fast it will cause 5 to 6 foot waves to crash onto Rattlesnake Island all the way from Bear Island! Batten down the hatches!

[kjbathe]

Wading in against my better judgment...

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Manpower will have to be deployed to target marinas along the coast

How exactly is this neighborhood watch program by recreational boaters going to deplete Marine Patrol? The last time I checked, my local police department came under no additional pressure when my neighbors and I started keeping a better eye out for misdeeds in our neighborhood.

If I'm reading Airwaves correctly, if/when recreational boaters are educated on ways to keep a better eye on the lake it's going to create a big whooshing sound caused by MP officers getting sucked to the coast? That kind of thinking is why we don't let you vote in NH

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by kjbathe
How exactly is this neighborhood watch program by recreational boaters going to deplete Marine Patrol? The last time I checked, my local police department came under no additional pressure when my neighbors and I started keeping a better eye out for misdeeds in our neighborhood.

If I'm reading Airwaves correctly, if/when recreational boaters are educated on ways to keep a better eye on the lake it's going to create a big whooshing sound caused by MP officers getting sucked to the coast? That kind of thinking is why we don't let you vote in NH

This is not exactly like looking out your window and calling the Cops.

As I understand the Homeland Security mandate New Hampshire will have to develop and implement programs in which recreational boaters keep watch on coastal vessels.

The New Hampshire Marine Patrol will be required to develop the program, implement and enforce it as well as monitor coastal recreational boats.

The Homeland Security mandate is to make sure recreational boats are not a threat and can be used as a "Neighborhood Watch". That means NHMP, not Homeland Security, needs to inspect, board and make sure that "we" are not a threat and can be trusted at all times.

How is this going to effect Lake Winnipesaukee? The bulk of the NH Marine Patrol boats and crews are on Lake Winnipesaukee. So now that Homeland Security has added additional responsibilities the NH Marine Patrol boats and crews will be needed to patrol, monitor and interact with coastal boaters. Some of those additional Marine Patrol boats and crews will come from Lake Winnipesaukee. Because NH does not fund the Marine Patrol from the General Fund (taxes) funding comes from boat registrations. Those registrations are likely to remain stable or drop because of the economy so we are asking the Marine Patrol to do much more with less funding.

So, let's add the new Homeland Security mandate to the proposed Speed Limit bill! These additional mandates will divert Marine Patrol boats and manpower from safety patrols on Lake Winnipesaukee to radar posts and patrols along the coast.

That leaves Lake Winnipesaukee with fewer Marine Patrol boats helping to maintain safety on our lake.

There is no additional funding coming the way of the Marine Patrol. So given the increase in costs...gasoline for one...even level funding is a cut. Now we're going to add two additional mandates and expect that things will remain the same? I don't think so.

No whooshing sound. Homeland Security trumps. Fewer Marine Patrol Boats and crews patrolling on Winnipesaukee because of the Homeland Security mandate, and fewer still because of radar posts. Add them up (or actually reduce tne number) and we get a less safe lake.

[CanisLupusArctos]

When I look at the big picture, I see an issue that stands a good chance of dissipating on its own. On other threads we're already beginning to see comments from people who aren't planning to go out on the water as much (or at all) this summer due to the high price of fuel. The talking heads are already on TV priming us for $6.00/gallon gas NEXT summer. Since the speeding issue involves boats that generally use more fuel than smaller, slower boats, my question is: "How many people would speed around this lake if gas was $6.00 a gallon?" Assuming gas keeps going up, which now seems a fair assumption, how much would it rise between now and 5 years from now, and how many go-fast boaters would be willing to pay for it?

One could argue, "They're rich people who won't care." However, I've noticed that most people who look rich usually aren't. Banks often own the majority of everything those people have - an unstable scenario in times like this.

If gas prices somehow find a way back to where they were last summer and then somehow find a way to stay there for a few years, my question would be rendered pointless. If gas prices stay on the trend they started 4-5 years ago (and the direction of global events seems to indicate that they will,) then I see this lake having fewer boats every year. That would render this topic a dying one.

[kjbathe]

Originally Posted by Airwaves

No whooshing sound. Homeland Security trumps. Fewer Marine Patrol Boats and crews patrolling on Winnipesaukee because of the Homeland Security mandate, and fewer still because of radar posts. Add them up (or actually reduce tne number) and we get a less safe lake.

It's a point of view. As I've posted before, speed limit or not, I don't think it materially changes any behaviors on the lake. And just because we have a speed limit doesn't mean MP has to enforce a speed limit. I think it's analogous to all those cruisers on the road that may or may not be running radar and may or may not pull you over if you're speeding in your car.

We have thousands of laws and not all of them can be enforced. With a speed limit bill, I think MP will have another tool to help encourage safe behavior. If they are anything like the vast majority of law enforcement professionals I know out there, their interest is in making sure people are operating in a way that doesn't pose a significant risk them themselves of the people around them. I can't imagine that MP officers have any more interest than the rest of us in them becoming floating speed Nazis. But only time will bear that out.

I know others feel strongly about the speed limit issue one way or the other for a variety of different and valid reasons. I'm just not one of them. Either way, I don't think the enactment of a speed limit law will have any impact on how folks boat on the big lake. And to the issue of Homeland Security, how many unfunded mandates really get implemented in a meaningful way? I have no reason to expect the waterborne neighborhood patrol to be any different. And yes, I'm OK with that. The war with terrorism in which we are engaged is far more complex than flying planes into buildings, banning water bottles on aircraft or floating dirty bombs into the ports along our coastline. But I don't think we even want to start that discussion here...

Where's the warm weather of past two weeks? I'm ready to get out there!

[winnilaker]

Originally Posted by chipj29

What are the benchmarks going to be? If statistics show that "speeding" is not a problem now, what will show that the new law was effective? It is not possible for the number of high-speed accidents to go down, since there have been none in recent years.

If benchmarks are not being used now to implement a speed limit. Benchmarks will not used to keep it. The same people that told the same stories in support the speed will come out again and tell a different story, that the its made a huge positive difference. One word vs another. IT WILL be next to impossible to rescind this law after its in place and the supporters know that. Once a law is in place, it's hard to remove it. The sunset clause was nothing more than a way to attract more votes of those on the fence, no relevance.

[Airwaves]

kjbathe wrote in part:
just because we have a speed limit doesn't mean MP has to enforce a speed limit.

That is one of the major problems.

In addition to the proposal being unnecessary it will be impossible to enforce without a major committment of manpower. Without radar posts there will be no way to prove a boat's speed in court. I could go past a Marine Patrol boat doing 60 outside of the 150' zone and there would be no way he/she could positively tell the court how fast I was going without radar.

So if the law is passed and there are no radar posts then what's the point? The Marine Patrol will not be able to bring speeding charges against anyone without radar. Therefore there is no additional tool to place in their arsenal.

As I have suggested a number of times, if the people who believe this is a major issue want a real solution, then adopt USCG Nav Rule 6. This would give the Marine Patrol the ability to visually determine what is happening on the water as conditions dictate, and give them the authority to act and such action would stand up in court.

As for the Homeland Security mandate, as a now retired member of Homeland Security via the Coast Guard Auxiliary I can assure you that port security has been something the Coast Guard has been pushing for since before 9-11 and if Homeland Security can come up with something and mandate that the state's develop and implement a program involving recreational boaters to help secure ports then they will, but it will be up to the states to operate and fund it.

That mandate will divert manpower and boats from the Marine Patrol to the new priority. That's just a fact of life.