New use for a gf-bl!

[fatlazyless]

Let me think for just a minute here on this one. If and when House Bill 162 gets approved by the NH House of Representatives, the NH Senate and the NH Governor and becomes the law in NH, here are some ideas on what to do with all the go fast-be loud, performance boats.

First, it could be sold to someone in New York, New Jersey, Maine, Florida, Europe, Asia, Saudi Arabia, Austrailia, or somewhere. There are many good marinas on the lake who would be happy to try to sell it on consignment. Maybe, www.faysboatyard.com is a good one over in Gilford.

Some more creative uses are; put the hull on your front yard and fill it with dirt and create a nice flowery decorative planter. You sometimes see that done with old canoes and row boats so why not a gfbl?

Another use: the hull of a 32' gfbl turned upside down could become the new roof of a room addition or a garage or utility building. It's certainly waterproof as long as it gets waxed and buffed once/year. Just picture yourself up on a ladder every Spring waxing and buffing your old gfbl hull after it has been transformed into a utility shed roof. It wuold be a very fitting use, having gone fom being totally useless to a type of Winnipesaukee art-deco storage shed. How about an upside-sown 47' Fountain storage shed? Looks good to me!

Any creative suggestions or new use ideas out there?

[rickstr66]

Continue to use them just like they have in the past. You don't really think this will make them go away if it passes? Do you?
If I owned a motorcycle in NH and all of a sudden a law passed so that I had to wear a helmet, I would not then sell my motorcycle and go elsewhere. I would use a helmet.
I'm a bass boat owner. I fish NH lakes a lot, spending an average of 20 days a season fishing Winni, Squam and Winnisquam. I will not "take my boat and go home" if this bill passes.
The boats will stay and continue to make use of the lake to your dismay.

[BroadHopper]

This is really getting sick. I think this guy is going way over board. I do know that the proponents have the larger cruisers in mind when this bill pass. Then they will target the PWC's.
I won't be able to enjoy my favorite sport of barefoot skiing. If you look at the barefoot association web page, 43.6 mph is the minimum for skiing. 50 and over is used for tournaments and tricks.

[Cal]

Don't count your chickens before they're hatched
Just heard thought the grapevine , Virginia just defeated their speed limit bill
Smith Mountain Lake (where "What about Bob" was filmed) remains free

[pm203]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Let me think for just a minute here on this one. If and when House Bill 162 gets approved by the NH House of Representatives, the NH Senate and the NH Governor and becomes the law in NH, here are some ideas on what to do with all the go fast-be loud, performance boats.

First, it could be sold to someone in New York, New Jersey, Maine, Florida, Europe, Asia, Saudi Arabia, Austrailia, or somewhere. There are many good marinas on the lake who would be happy to try to sell it on consignment. Maybe, www.faysboatyard.com is a good one over in Gilford.

Some more creative uses are; put the hull on your front yard and fill it with dirt and create a nice flowery decorative planter. You sometimes see that done with old canoes and row boats so why not a gfbl?

Another use: the hull of a 32' gfbl turned upside down could become the new roof of a room addition or a garage or utility building. It's certainly waterproof as long as it gets waxed and buffed once/year. Just picture yourself up on a ladder every Spring waxing and buffing your old gfbl hull after it has been transformed into a utility shed roof. It wuold be a very fitting use, having gone fom being totally useless to a type of Winnipesaukee art-deco storage shed. How about an upside-sown 47' Fountain storage shed? Looks good to me!

Any creative suggestions or new use ideas out there?

You really DO have too much time on your hands.

[ITD]

Another "fact" from the proponents of the speed limit "GFBL boats will go away". Just as wrong as the other data they claim to have......

[codeman671]

My guess is that they will circle Bear Island at 44.9mph and at 85 decibles hooting and hollering (while sober) just for the heck of it.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by codeman671

My guess is that they will circle Bear Island at 44.9mph and at 85 decibles hooting and hollering (while sober) just for the heck of it.

The question should be what if the speedlimit does not pass? Can we take all of HB162 supporters and turn them into law-abiding citizens?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Cal

Don't count your chickens before they're hatched
Just heard thought the grapevine , Virginia just defeated their speed limit bill
Smith Mountain Lake (where "What about Bob" was filmed) remains free

Just one of many such speed bills was defeated.

Today's VA bill is to limit speed to 35-MPH at night; even to many go-fasts, this seems too generous.

Smith Mountain Lake's "Most Knowledgable and Most Experienced Speedboater for 2005" night-collision which killed two (and their dog—no guests on board) only occurred six months ago.

Lake Winnipesaukee has been waiting four years!

Why quote Smith Mountain Lake's bills anyway? "Collisions on other lakes don't count", I recall.


.

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

This is really getting sick. I think this guy is going way over board. I do know that the proponents have the larger cruisers in mind when this bill pass. Then they will target the PWC's.
I won't be able to enjoy my favorite sport of barefoot skiing. If you look at the barefoot association web page, 43.6 mph is the minimum for skiing. 50 and over is used for tournaments and tricks.

BH,
FLL's comments do not reflect those of anyone except himself and a very few others who seem to simply dislike cigarette boaters. While he is certainly entitled to his own opinion, please don't generalize that he represents all proponents or else you are just doing the same thing you are wrongly accusing proponents of doing. Almost every HB162 supporter I have met has been a supporter because of his/her concern for safety. With only a few exceptions among us, we don't want cigarette boaters to leave, we just want them, and all boaters, to slow down to a reasonable speed. 45mph is surely a reasonable speed for any appropriate recreational activity on a crowded lake.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Why quote Smith Mountain Lake's bills anyway? "Collisions on other lakes don't count", I recall.

They don't . Seems to me alot of people have been trying to use them.
And btw , I have NO problem with night time speed limits. There have been plenty of times it was so dark I didn't go over headway speed.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

BH,
FLL's comments do not reflect those of anyone except himself and a very few others who seem to simply dislike cigarette boaters. While he is certainly entitled to his own opinion, please don't generalize that he represents all proponents or else you are just doing the same thing you are wrongly accusing proponents of doing. Almost every HB162 supporter I have met has been a supporter because of his/her concern for safety. With only a few exceptions among us, we don't want cigarette boaters to leave, we just want them, and all boaters, to slow down to a reasonable speed. 45mph is surely a reasonable speed for any appropriate recreational activity on a crowded lake.

Fat Jack,
Its nice to know your view on the subject. The starter of this post has views that I find insulting as well as ignorant. Why bask in the light of someones possible misfortune(if HB162 passes)? If Hb162 does get shot down, you won,t see me here rubbing your face in it.....A little more diplomacy and tact woul be appreciated, after all, we all enjoy the same lake.Thank you once again for differentiating yourself from the others.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

BH,
45mph is surely a reasonable speed for any appropriate recreational activity on a crowded lake.

So barefoot skiing is not an appropriate recreational activity?????

I am fuming!

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

So barefoot skiing is not an appropriate recreational activity?

BH,
According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barefoo...determination), who is certainly not a big safety advocate, 45MPH is ample speed for anyone who weighs up to 250 pounds. A 200 pound man should do just fine at 40MPH. I'm guessing you must be pretty heavy.

"Proper barefoot speed determination:
Many people, especially those starting out, are unsure as to how fast they must go to barefoot. What follows is a simple formula to give you an estimated speed you should ski at."
Skier's weight (lb) ÷ 10 + 20 = boat speed (mph)

Of course this does impact some of us. It implies for instance that I cannot stay up at less than 51MPH. But I don't think anyone in my physical condition should be undertaking such a strenuous activity as barefoot skiing.

And they do disclaim;"speed is based a lot on personal preference, so this is only a guideline", but should we really be tailoring our laws and compromising public safety to accommodate the personal preferences of a few?

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by FatJack

BH,
45mph is surely a reasonable speed for any appropriate recreational activity on a crowded lake.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

So barefoot skiing is not an appropriate recreational activity?????

I am fuming!

I disagree ... why would 60 mph be inappropriate ? How about where and when the lake isn't "crowded" ?

PS - and stop calling me Shirley

[ApS]

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...004/-1/CITIZEN

'Kinda surprised no supporter posted this after it appeared Saturday.

Regrettably, the article is written in provocative tones, using words like "whispered", "behind-the-scenes", "lobbying", "may be a move", and "fighting to continue".

Most revealing was this:

Rep. Michael Whalley, R-Alton, is opposed to the bill. In full disclosure, Whalley sells boats, but added he does not "sell the type of boats people have been critical of."

THIS is "full disclosure"? We ALL know what boats he sells; why "cloak" it as a lawyer might? Because they're capable of exceeding the speed limit—and a general nuisance to lakeside residents and to other boaters?

FLL, a 47-foot Fountain is too narrow to make a good storage shed roof—but there's still hope for an inexpensive fiberglass roof. From what I've been reading, the ocean is too much for these production fiberglass boats. They end up in our lake after getting worn out offshore.

Without HB162, we're looking at what even smaller lakes (50-sq.mi.) have to put up with:
http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/s...d.php?t=121234 (AM maintenance).


.

[Hottrucks]

Originally Posted by Fat Jack

BH,
we just want them, and all boaters, to slow down to a reasonable speed. 45mph is surely a reasonable speed for any appropriate recreational activity on a crowded lake.

45mph is surely a reasonable speed for any appropriate recreational activity on a crowded lake

I agree with this but what about going 3 miles off shore or the rest of the year which is far more than a few weekends?? This is where I have issues?? Who bothers who in early spring, late fall or on a mid week ride ( which we all know is the best boating) and why should those people be slapped on the wrist because of the (this is the joke part) High accedent rate of fast boats?? I don't understand??
If this was going to cure the problems on the lake I would be all for it but I don't see it doing anything but making the phone lines busier than it already is on the week ends again when most of us are watching all the BAD PEOPLE out there from the docks?

[Paugus Bay Resident]

NHMP's Lt. Dunleavy: "80% of Winnipesaukee boaters have alcohol on board."

Especially beware of those 80% in kayaks!

APS, good point. Like the 3 we rounded up one summer night (about 9:30) trying to make there way (from between Welch and Govenor's) to Meredith bay. According to them, they were lost.

You see, they come in all shapes and sizes

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

THIS is "full disclosure"? We ALL know what boats he sells;

Actually I don't know what kind of boats he sells, could you enlighten me? In general, wouldn't you want a lake resident with extensive boating knowledge making lake boating rules? Doesn't this make his opinion more valuable?

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

"full disclosure"

"My spies tell me ..." said Pilliod.

Maybe this Representative, should disclose who his spies are. Talk about provocative tones.

Pilliod said. "...But we can't use 'reasonable and prudent' in court because the court will say 'reasonable and prudent by whose judgment?'"

Well, even Pilliod's version of the bill uses 'reasonable and prudent', so he's undermining a portion of his own bill before it's even passed. If 'reasonable and prudent' has no teeth, then I can fly around the lake all day at 45mph with no regard for swimmers, kayaks, traffic, and sailboats as long as I maintain 150', is that the law he's trying to pass?

[Seaplane Pilot]

Quote from the Citizen Article: "While fishermen in the state opposed the legislation, the New Hampshire Lakes Association is in full support, and in fact lobbied to have the bill apply to all bodies of water."

I get the impression from this quote that they consider the New Hampshire Lakes Association as the experts on this matter. On what basis?

[Misty Blue]

I have always enjoyed this Forum. For many reasons but most of all for the pleasure of the members friendliness.

While the HB 162 subject has certainly devided our little group it has always been a political debate. That is a good thing. Friendly debate.

While I do have my opinion on the subject I have never posted it. There has been talk enough and I don't think that any one is going to have a change of heart after all of the debate. I am however saddened when members find joy in other boaters loss.

If, indeed HB 162 passes and is signed into law the GF boaters will suffer.

The boats that they love and have paid thousands of dollars for will drop in value greatly. If they choose to continue to operate their boats as they were intended they must leave the Lake. OUR Lake. Driven off.

If they decide to stay on the Lake and keep it under 45, a thrilling pastime of theirs will be gone.

If they sell their GF boats to people in other States and stay on the Lake they will lose a bundle in the sale and have to find new boats to buy.

If HB 162 passes they will lose money, their favorite pastime, or be driven off of the Lake. Weather the speed bill is a good thing or a bad thing they will be hurt.

Lord knows that I like a joke but I would find no glee in their loss and to make fun of it is not consistant with the fellowship of this group.

Just my thoughts.

Misty Blue

[fatlazyless]

Not to worry, Misty Blue, methinks there is very little chance of HB 162 getting a yes vote from the NH House of Representatives. Too much influence peddling by the various supporters of the go-fasts will help to tip the scales to your side. As you know the House is decidedly Republican and they are decidedly pro-business and many Republican state reps will view a speed limit bill as being anti-business. If HB 162 with a 45-25 speed limit becomes a NH law, I will be very surprised.

HB162 will just fade away over the horizon of the not-too-frozen February lake and soon be forgot.... am sorry to say.

[Misty Blue]

As I said Less, I have not taken sides in this debate. My concern is only for the feelings of others. I hope that you understand.

Misty Blue

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Misty Blue

I have always enjoyed this Forum. For many reasons but most of all for the pleasure of the members friendliness.

While the HB 162 subject has certainly devided our little group it has always been a political debate. That is a good thing. Friendly debate.

While I do have my opinion on the subject I have never posted it. There has been talk enough and I don't think that any one is going to have a change of heart after all of the debate. I am however saddened when members find joy in other boaters loss.

If, indeed HB 162 passes and is signed into law the GF boaters will suffer.

The boats that they love and have paid thousands of dollars for will drop in value greatly. If they choose to continue to operate their boats as they were intended they must leave the Lake. OUR Lake. Driven off.

If they decide to stay on the Lake and keep it under 45, a thrilling pastime of theirs will be gone.

If they sell their GF boats to people in other States and stay on the Lake they will lose a bundle in the sale and have to find new boats to buy.

If HB 162 passes they will lose money, their favorite pastime, or be driven off of the Lake. Weather the speed bill is a good thing or a bad thing they will be hurt.

Lord knows that I like a joke but I would find no glee in their loss and to make fun of it is not consistant with the fellowship of this group.

Just my thoughts.

Misty Blue

Thank you for your thoughts. While I do not think that the value of the boats will drop, the enjoyment will some what. I do like to go fast, when it is safe. I hope that the bill does not pass but if it does I will abide by the new rules. I have zero issue with the night time speed limit I actually think that is a very smart law. I never drive at speed after dark anyhow.

Jon

[fatlazyless]

Ok, I understand that you are not taking any one side. And, let us all understand that a 45-25 speed limit doesn't dispossess anyone of their gf-bl. Plenty of people buy and drive cars that can go a lot faster than 65mph.

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Ok, I understand that you are not taking any one side. And, let us all understand that a 45-25 speed limit doesn't dispossess anyone of their gf-bl. Plenty of people buy and drive cars that can go a lot faster than 65mph.

Yes and most of them drive them much faster then the 65mph speed limit. In fact most everyone drives quite a bit faster then the 65 mph speed limit.

[fatlazyless]

As for people driving faster than the 65mph speed limit. I am familiar with the general driving habits on Route 93 going from Boston north into New Hampshire on up to the Lakes region at exit 23. My experience is that the speeds in Mass are faster than the speeds in New Hampshire. As cars head north and approach the Mass-NH border, they slow down because many times, there's a green & bronze trooper-cruiser set up running radar on the border. Up and down Rt 93, from Boston to Lincoln & north, the NH road is less congested, more scenic, slower & safer. Maybe it's the better green scenery, and maybe it's the less traffic and maybe it's the speed enforcement, but it all adds up to a safer road.

[Woodsy]

Here is what the biggest supporter of HB-162 had to say about speed limits....

Acres per Second aka InHarmsWay

1) On two long auto trips I've taken since November, I noticed that cars and trucks were passing me as usual, though I USUALLY exceed the limit by 6-9 MPH. The highways didn't seem less crowded, either.


I am assuming that while traveling on some of the 70MPH Florida interstates you were going almost 80 MPH? at very least a minimum 76 MPH? Or perhaps while here in NH you were traveling at 74MPH? One could interpret this statement as you routinely travel 34MPH on a 25 MPH road. Remember that picture? What about your much touted "tunnel vision"? At 79 MPH it doesn't affect you in a car? but it does in a boat?

I think its funny that you spout on and on how "Speed Kills" and speed limits are about safety, yet you show a complete lack of respect for our existing speed limits on the roads?

Woodsy

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Here is what the biggest supporter of HB-162 had to say about speed limits....

Actually, I had nothing to do with the inception of HB162 but support it because it's the best way to rein in Capt. "B" (aka "Cowboys").

I've given up my weekends and cloudy days to get out on the water.

It's absurd to consider using my mandatory whistle to signal an approaching speedboat. Using the sun and a signal mirror, I tried to signal oversized boats approaching at daunting speeds. It sorta worked—but too many still aren't watching ahead at the speeds they are carrying. Some acknowledge with a wave—not certain if that's comforting or not.

Originally Posted by Wordsy

Acres per Second aka InHarmsWay

1) On two long auto trips I've taken since November, I noticed that cars and trucks were passing me as usual, though I USUALLY exceed the limit by 6-9 MPH. The highways didn't seem less crowded, either.

Truly "taken out of context": The thread is titled "Petroleum Prices", and that American drivers haven't changed their driving habits since this summer's record prices.

Though my BMW M318is could maintain 130MPH on the Interstates without overheating, I have no tickets since I adopted a "9-over" policy—about fifteen years ago. Highway Patrolmen have "picked-off" drivers creeping up on me! It's possible that my speedometer is wrong—aside from most 18-wheelers, I seldom pass anybody.

Here's my post about having to park my treasured VW microbus when the 55MPH law was replaced by 65. That post relates to "Reasonable and Prudent" or why MY little powerboat would be unsafe at 45MPH, whereas a 54-foot Fountain would be safe at 70MPH.

As to "tunnel vision": It kicks in with adrenalin. Adrenalin is the body's natural response to "risk-taking"—such as that experienced when "skimming".

Risk-takers risk more than themselves, though. Here's a list of some from fresh/protected waters who will never have a say in HB162:

James Colonna
John Colonna
Simon Prankerd
Don Draper
Roger Wypyszynski
Joseph Mongelluzzo
William Sanderson
Alan Richards
Judith Lewis
Lawrence Lewis
Scott Brabander (Poker Run)
Mike Scaffidi (Poker Run)
John DeSouza, Jr. (Poker Run)

(I'm certain I've left some body out, though).

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I am assuming that while traveling on some of the 70MPH Florida interstates you were going almost 80 MPH? at very least a minimum 76 MPH? Or perhaps while here in NH you were traveling at 74MPH? One could interpret this statement as you routinely travel 34MPH on a 25 MPH road. Remember that picture?

One could; however, it's actually a scenic 18-square mile land-mass, and 34MPH is too fast to rubberneck. Violators there are the commercial interests. Lake Winnipesaukee is scenic, too: It is less scenic at 130MPH.

I expect that at HB162's firm 45/25 limits, it may take a decade before some common sense emerges on Winnipesaukee. Even at the rate of 4-5 tickets a year—and assuming that the NHMPs will lose all of them in court—the word will get out eventually that boaters on Winnipesaukee don't like 70MPH boats approaching from astern. Insurance rates may weigh-in more than HB162 ever could.

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I think its funny that you spout on and on how "Speed Kills" and speed limits are about safety, yet you show a complete lack of respect for our existing speed limits on the roads?

You'll need to consult with your chauffeur—or get out a little more. I suspect nobody goes the highway speed limit because Troopers allow an 8% variation in speedometer readings.

BTW: Look for a "Speedometer Defense" in 2007.

BTW II: Lt. Dunleavy (NHMP) stated that 80% of Winnipesaukee boaters carry alcohol on board. Contrast that with those of us who drive the Interstate.



.

[Woodsy]

APS aka InHarmsWay....

I completely took your post out of context. The same way you take information gleaned from other sources out of context and put your spin on it. As per your standard, I left out most of the pertinent details.

However, your words do speak volumes as to your attitude. You show a complete lack of respect for posted speed limits. Your defense to USUALLY exceeding the speed limit by 9MPH is "I suspect nobody goes the highway speed limit because Troopers allow an 8% variation in speedometer readings."

So essentially because everybody else is breaking the law, it is ok for you to as well? I would like to think you were brought up better than that. I know I was.

You have shown a complete disdain for speed laws, the very same speed laws that you would like to see enacted on Lake Winnipesaukee. Yet you accuse the hi-performance boater of having no respect for the law. In fact I don't see all that much of a difference between you and those you are so quick to disparage.

In your post above you state you drive a BMW 318is. Last I checked a BMW 318is is an expensive high performance sports sedan. It is certainly not your run of the mill grocery getting Ford or Chevy, and a far cry from your old VW bus! Yet you routinely disparage those who would drive a high performance boats, insinuating they are all “Cowboys” and Capt. Boneheads. I am willing to bet people have seen more bonehead moves from BMW drivers on the highway than they have hi-performance boaters on the lake. The running joke for years has been that “turn signals are optional on BMW’s and Volvos”.

You drive an expensive high performance sedan in excess of the posted speed limits on a routine basis. Yet you are quick to show a disdain for those who drive expensive hi-performance boats… legally? How are you so different from the high performance boater that you so strongly dislike? I am sure you will bring up the accidents/fatalities/drunk argument. But the same arguments could be made for BMW owners. I am sure I could compile quite the long list of people who were killed by drivers of BMW's.

Your crack in reference to “My Chauffer” is way out of line. Unlike you I don’t have a house on Lake Winnipesaukee with an 50’ dock, drive an expensive BMW sports sedan and winter in Florida at another Lake house. I am a working stiff, my house is not on the water, I rent my dock, and I drive a 9 yr old Dodge Ram with 140000 miles on it.

Its not illegal to carry alcohol on a boat or a car... Lt. Dunleaveys statement was made years ago, prior to the much stiffer penalties that are in place now. BWI/DWI has nothing to do with speed limit. If your willing to drive drunk, knowing how severe the penalties are, then a little $50-$100 speeding ticket isn't going to stop you.

Woodsy

[ApS]

How 'bout a truce? The vote is today—for better or worse.

BTW: My car is 15 years old and my dock is half what you say it is. Your "Life Choices" differ from mine.

[fatlazyless]

One things for sure and that's that both sides of HB 162 do everything they can to stack the deck in their own favor. House Speaker Doug Scamman has said that the House Republican leadership has no recommendation on this bill and suggests that the Republican Reps vote their conscience.

So, what type of Republican leadership is that? Where's the last House Leader, Gene Chandler, when he's needed? For that matter, where's former Gov Craig Benson and what would he say about a 45-25 speed limit? As someone who drove a bronze metallic Hummer when he was the Gov, would Craig sign it into law or veto it?

[Paugus Bay Resident]

The debate and vote are scheduled to start at 1:20. There will likely be a "debate" to limit the pre-vote speaking to 10 minutes a side. So, depending how long the debate debate lasts, we may have a vote this afternoon.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

One things for sure and that's that both sides of HB 162 do everything they can to stack the deck in their own favor. House Speaker Doug Scamman has said that the House Republican leadership has no recommendation on this bill and suggests that the Republican Reps vote their conscience.

So, what type of Republican leadership is that? Where's the last House Leader, Gene Chandler, when he's needed? For that matter, where's former Gov Craig Benson and what would he say about a 45-25 speed limit? As someone who drove a bronze metallic Hummer when he was the Gov, would Craig sign it into law or veto it?

Unlike other parties, the Republicans can form their own opinions on the truths and untruths presented. Not everyone needs to be led around by the nose.

[Woodsy]

APS aka InHarmsWay...

I apologize... its a 50' dock, not an 80' dock as I had posted. I will correct my post.

A 15 year old expensive hi-performance Sports Sedan is still a hi-performance Sports Sedan... sans the expensive part. Depreciation is a killer. The age of the vehicle doesn't matter.

My life choices do differ from yours. I don't fault your choices, they are your choices to make. I don't infer that you are a "Cowboy" or a Capt. Bonehead just because you drive a BMW. Just because your car can go 130 MPH, I don't automatically assume that you drive it that fast all the time on a crowded road. Yet you choose to make those assumptions (and many more)about those whose choice in boats are similar to your choice of car.

Truce it is...

Woodsy