Not the first time for Braun Bay Signs
 

I remember some years ago there were several signs posted in Braun Bay with rafting restrictions. They were smaller than the one pictured above and were placed 75 feet from shore. Anyone else remember those or have pictures?

The sign that is there now is hard to read from most parts of the bay. If there are already some boats at anchor there you will probably not even see the sign. Well intentioned idea to publicize the information but poorly executed.

The older signs were more aesthetic and easier to read. They also served the purpose of showing the 75 foot distance from shore
.

Braun Bay Rafting to be Banned
 

Betsey Patten is filing a bill to ban rafting in Braun Bay. Read the Moultonborough BOS minutes.

http://www.moultonborough.org/Pages/...11-19-2009.pdf

Hopefully it will fail. When bans are selective, it just concentrates the boats somewhere else. An all or nothing approach will work. Otherwise, the lake is less attractive to boaters.

Just curious as I am not a boater and don't live on the lake. Would a ban on rafting benefit the private lakeshore property owners, presumably because it keeps all the boats from congregating close to their shore ?

yes
 

yes, i would say that's the specific intent.

Conspiracy
 

Second in a conspiracy to curtail boating on the lake.

All or nothing
 

Of course bans benefit shoreline residents, but it is not a reasonable benefit. The problem is that when one area is banned, it concentrates those who raft into fewer spots. It would be best for all lakeshore property owners to share the rafting traffic, or just ban rafting all together. When one ban is approved, it is unfair to the rest of the property owners. What makes Braun Bay more special than Bahama Beach, Advent Cove, Buzzels Cove, Green's Basin, etc? In my view, there have been already too many bans approved, and some should be reversed. Then, Braun wouldn't have as much pressure and yet another ban would not be needed.

In the inner Green's Basin rafting s banned!

Oversized for Winni...
 

Alhough my adjacent two miles of shoreline is protected, shallow, long, and straight, this "dock-soaker" shows the probable reason there have been no rafters anchored here in recent years.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...1&d=1248439267

I have been watching this thread and reading it with some great amusement as well as making me bitter to say the least.

I have been going to Braun Bay for decades. First off I love congregating with my fellow boaters. I really do enjoy meeting different people and hearing great boating stories. The bay is one of the only large sandbars that this can be done at. I know of many of the others bays and sandbars but none that I know of provides for such a large sandy area with a private shoreline where you are not in front of someones inhabited property.

That being said, I have seen Braun Bay in its best of times and worst. 4th of July weekend or a hot sunny weekend could be the most crowded.. If you don't like crowds you really shouldn't be on the lake on those particular times. However most of the weekends it is busy but not over crowded.... but thats why people go there not for solitude. There is no way to keep people from anchoring right next to you on a weekend day. I have tried keeping my distance but it simply fills up. And you can either get upset or not go.

The best piece of advice was to bring your digital camera along. I get there early in the day and snap a few pictures. When the marine patrol inevdiably show up, you have proof that other boaters anchored too close to you. However I have never had to do that. When the MP's show up it is usually late afternoon and time to go anyway.

As far as the rafting laws, I do not agree with them what so ever. 25ft, 50ft etc etc.... Where do these numbers come from?? It isn't like we are staying on board over night and have to worry about safe distances in case of a anchorline snapping. I can understand distance from shore and enough room in case of a medical emergency you can get boats out, but if you have two boats rafted why do they need to be further away then one boat anchored?

As far as this new bill "no rafting" in braun bay. This is just another feel good law that won't accomplish anything. People will still congregate there and raft there until it is split up. It isn't a law to ban boats but to keep them from roping together. What does that accomplish?

Too many laws to regulate a few people that don't have regard for others anyway. Pass a law they will break it regardless. It only takes away from our personal freedoms and adds another regulation to an already over regulated lake.

Braun Bay Rafting
 

I am confused. Isn't rafting in Braun Bay already banned? The legal definition of a raft in NH is 3 or more boats isn't? Unless she wants to ban 2 boats tied together. Then you would have to define RAFT in Braun Bay differently than other areas of the lake that ban rafting as you can tie 2 boats together in areas that ban rafting.

If thats the intent of the bill, to ban tieing 2 boats together, I don't see what that will accomplish. The bay will still be filled with anchored boats on warm sunny weekends. What will change?

You are correct. It is a no rafting area. I think the next law will try to create a no anchor zone! OCDACTIVE is absolutely correct in his postings. How sad for people to spend their lives trying to rule others.

No Rafting zones doen't really mean NO Rafting
 

Yep, the rules and labels are confusing. Rafting is TWO or MORE boats tied together. Here on Lake Winnipesaukee, the No Rafting Zones (NRZs) really mean RESTRICTED rafting zones. In those NRZs rafting is restricted to no more than TWO boats together.

The sign shown in Woodsy's thread starter says Rafting Restrictions. The first bulleted item on that sign says: No more than two boats per raft.

So, a No Rafting Zone on Winnie actually means rafting Restricted to no more than 2 boats per raft. You may also note that other NRZ restrictions may vary from zone to zone - such as distance from shore.

I am not in favor of banning all rafts in Braun Bay or anywhere else on the Lake. I don't see how this proposal would benefit the citizens of NH.

Betsey Patten...
 

Another name on the list of people to vote out when they are up for re-election. This is going to be fun! :D

Braun Bay Rafting
 

Can someone clue me in? Who is the "aggrevied" party in this? Is it one or two homeowners? Is there a behavior that needs to be curtailed from people or is it realistically their mere presence that people are working to get rid of?

I do believe that people should be respectful of people's property, however, I fail to see the difference between boats "rafting" or 200 single boats all anchored in a given area.

If loud music is an issue, have that enforced. Trash, trespassing, are the issue then have MP enforce those laws. If someone is doing the aforementioned behavior, bans imposed on rafting are going to have ZERO impact on changing that persons behavior.

Personally, when I have watched people throw their cigarettes in the water right next to their own boat in the sand bar area, now THAT should be loss of lake privileges for LIFE!

Aps you have used that same picture multiple times to try to prove multiple different points. Last time I think it was to say a high speed boater caused those (which is doubtful). So what are you getting at?

Everybody's got to be Someplace...
 

The picture appeared just once: http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...&postcount=211

What I stated in late August:

(Translated, that means I never saw the boat that made that wake). ;)

Since then, I'd kept my eyes peeled and have identified the boat—after a second soaking. :mad:

What I'm "getting at" was to try to provoke the thought that rafting may need to be allowed to concentrate somewhere: Winnipesaukee's "Boat demographics" have changed in recent years.

Over lunch, I wouldn't want to be rafting and hit by a wake like that, when it can so thoroughly soak a dock even with the lake "down" in late-August.

It was probably the Mt. Washington! :emb:

You don't even know what a 'dock soaker' is unless you live on the east side of The Broads between LSP and Ames Farm. It is more of a 'dock destroyer'. Mute point.

My Point Exactly!
 

You appear to be aiding my point, that there are fewer places available today for a quiet raft-up due to disturbances.

The monies spent by the MPs to personally advise rafters of the law would be better spent on creating a safe and sandy place with appropriately-spaced mooring balls.

It would be meaningful to truck in rocks and sand over the ice to a location far from residents whose peaceable times at their heavily-taxed properties are disrupted by today's loud sound systems, a party atmosphere, air pollution, water pollution, trash, cooking fires plus the "personal-smoke-product-of-choice".

(A website devoted to "social-rafting" named themselves "Lake Trash".
You can't make this stuff up!) :laugh:

Maybe so, but a gasoline fire at an unregulated raft-up like this one—a State Park—could produce a headline that won't allow the NHMP the luxury of ever looking the other way. :(

http://www.coolestspringbreak.com/im...from-above.jpg

Is this picture somewhere on Lake Winni??

Since your overtaxed ears, eyes, nose and internal thinking device is being hampered, are you willing to put some skin in this idea and throw down some money to make it happen.

I don't think its that bad of an idea, but I would probably never use it and I am also not complaining about the additional things that come along with owning property in a very public area, so I will likely invest my money elsewhere. But if I had to guess this would be something the state should have to pay for, no.

Braun Bay Home Owner
 

I live immediately on Braun Bay, I have a front seat view of what happens there throughout the Summer. I have enjoyed the discussion on the thread, with the exception of those pointing the shore side owners as being the primary source of complaint. I have asked the NHMP when they are patrolling what the source of most complaints is; they are almost 100% from boaters, trying to enjoy the bay, via cell phone and VHFs, not the home owners.

I do call the NHMP when:

1. My kids that sail the bay are endangered by boats or aircraft, they are always under my supervision. I do not feel I should have to, at any time, refrain from letting them sail because of unsafe boat traffic.
(By the way, to my surprise the safest and most courteous boaters are the go-fasts, and this is with my kids in 8 foot optis)
2. When the pilot of the SeaPlane opted to over fly their masts by about 50 ft while trying to land in the bay, I went to ask for a more prudent and FAA sanctioned approach to the bay but he left prior to my being able to go over, so I reported him (My father, a Naval Aviator and United Airlines Pilot estimated this clearance and is/was tempted to file with the FAA).
3. Loud Music and the Rebel Yells, not people play volleyball or playing but just yawping
4. Boat Horns
5. Littering

My family enjoy and love our spot and the Bay, we selected it being in the know of Braun Bay. The coming and going of boats (and Planes) and people enjoying the lake are an integral part of our Summer. We maybe called twice this season. All I ask is for people to be courteous and allow my 'peaceful' enjoyment of the bay as well.

I have provided pumps, battery boosters, extension cords, directions, tools and even jammed my knuckles to help folks enjoying the bay, as have my neighbors.

I will also go record that the sign stinks; however, the existing laws that govern navigation and safe mooring have been ignored and abused hence the sign. Give enough people, enough rope and someone will hang themselves. The sign will no longer allow boaters to be ignorant of the law, thereby making the current regs more easily enforced by the NHMP.

Another interesting point is the reason the rafting laws exist at all is for exactly the reason above, if one rafted boat goes up in flames and there are numerous rafters and an inability to disperse, the tragedy math is easy, then fingers will be pointed at our public safety officials for being negligent. As mentioned above I have boarded several vessels across the bay and been on the water my entire life, there is no doubt that with the condition of some of the ships the likelihood of an incident is not exactly remote.

Nice Reply!
 

Bucktail;

What a great, honest reply from someone "in the bay"! Stick around for awhile, this forum could use more of your contributions.

Dan

Bucktail, Welcome to the Forum and by no means was my comment directed at those that Do Not complain. Your view on water side living in a heavily used area is a great one. If you get a chance read back through other threads and you will get an idea of where I was coming from with my post above yours. Some folks own waterfront but are terrified of everything else that comes with it and are ripe to complain about it.

Braun Bay "Optimist"?
 

You're generally in favor of the sign, then.

There are homeowners on both sides of Braun Bay—some quite close to the revelers. (The closest being "for sale"). Could it be that the majority of complainants are those homeowners who face east?

"Optis", for those unfamiliar with the international "Optimist Pram" class, this photo:
http://www.robwilsonsailing.com/user...ZZANO01517.jpg

While "Optis' are often seen with even "littler" kids at the helm (than the above) an even smaller boat, the 6' "Cape Cod Frosty", is designed for adult sailors:

http://www.capecodfrosty.org/pics/carryfollan-sm.jpg

Since neither is over 12', both have "the NH advantage" of no registration fee required annually.
:look:

Any idea what the nature of these called-in complaints is? Braun Bay's southerly exposure should be fairly calm. (Except for the day I was cruising there! :eek:)

I would guess the complaints are for boats being to close to each other and maybe noise. While the 25 foot rule is a little overboard in my opinion, some folks anchor way too close to other boats late in the morning on weekends when the sand bar is full. There's also the occasional inconsiderate boater with really loud music playing. Oddly, it's usually middle-aged or older single (assuming single, they show up alone in their boats) guys doing it, the music is fairly modern (like something a 14 to 19 year old female would enjoy), and it's really really creepy and amusing to witness.

I am one of the Eastern facing houses and, again, my neighbors and I are not the source of the complaints, unless they are not telling the truth when I have asked if they complain.

I do not know the reasons for the complaints, but there is no lack of reason for complaint on any given day. From noise to unsafe boating to public drinking to lascivious behavior.

Acres per Second, please do not parse my comments and quote them out of context, I would not qualify my comments as an endorsement of the sign. I even say "The sign stinks". I also go on to say it is necessary as people, even in this thread, are unfamiliar with the existing laws making it difficult and contentious to enforce same. I suspect that if existing laws are unenforceable then more stringent laws will be proposed, as we are seeing happen.

Welcome to the forum and be proud that you have been parsed by the king.

Lol
 

Sik, You beat me to it!!

LOL, here also...

But Parsing is Catching On...
 

Thank yew...thankyewverymuch. :laugh:

(But you're catching up!) ;)

That explains it: it's the west-facing homes that have Braun Bay rafting "in their face": it'd be instructive to hear from those folks as well.

(And yes, welcome to the forum). :)

Boiled down, the context is both:

1) "...the sign stinks..."

2) "...it is necessary..."

:confused: :look: :confused:

Making it a question might have improved my original post:

No, I am not in favor of the sign, it stinks. I am also not in favor of speed limit signs on our highways; however, they are necessary to enforce the rules of the road allowing for safety and localization and not imposing a universal speed limit, which would have to go to the lowest common denominator.

That denominator wrt rafting would be no rafting.....which I would oppose.

Apologies for the bad analogy.

In my view I would prefer the sign be removed, boater safety certification, which addresses the laws on the sign, and the existing laws enforced through citation.

Here is the bill introduced by Moultonboro NH House Rep Betsey Patten for the 2010 session and her contact info if you care to write and let her know how you feel about this proposed legislation.
Phone: (603)253-6927
Email: [email protected]
New bills are scheduled for public hearings after the first of the year and the public is welcome and encouraged to attend and speak their mind for or against and also welcome to write to all committee members. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/hous....aspx?code=H22

HOUSE BILL 1466
AN ACT relative to rafting of boats in Braun Bay.
SPONSORS: Rep. Patten, Carr 4; Rep. Knox, Carr 4; Rep. Stevens, Carr 4

COMMITTEE: Resources, Recreation and Development

ANALYSIS

This bill establishes restrictions on the rafting of boats in Braun Bay.

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

10-2182

03/05

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Ten

AN ACT relative to rafting of boats in Braun Bay.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 New Section; Braun Bay. Amend RSA 270 by inserting after section 132 the following new section:

270:133 Braun Bay. No person shall form or allow the boat which he or she is operating or in charge of to be a member of a raft consisting of 3 or more boats in Braun Bay at any time when there are already 3 rafts consisting of 3 or more boats in Braun Bay. In this section, “raft” shall have the same meaning as in RSA 270:42, IV. Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a violation.

2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2011.

for that bill to even be worried about by the MP's, they would have to have boats sit in that bay all day long just to watch how many boats are rafted together. get a life and stop complaining about little things that just are not going to go away no matter how many of the braun bay land owners complain. that bay has been a wnni hot spot for years.

have the MP got out and worry about the real violators on the lake. reckless boating, drinking, over loaded boats, etc.

I don't understand how this changes anything. Doesn't current rafting laws restrict the number of boats in a raft to two or three anyway? What am I missing or has she just not read the current law?

I don't think so Airwaves. I think if there is a no rafting zone, you can only tie two boats together. If it is not restricted I believe you can tie as many boats as you want together.

So her proposal would limit Braun Bay to only three "rafting" groups after that no more than two boats can tie up together anywhere in the bay?

How does she propose to identify the first three rafts before all others are illegal?

I'm guessing this is another law the Marine Patrol did NOT ask for!!!

MP, just comes around and if there are more than 2 they tell them. I don't know how often they warn them as opposed to giving them a ticket. But I have seen MP go over to them. I think the last couple of years that has been one of the things they really watch for.

MP has a problem.
 

And that is, Who was there first and who are the real violators?

Many times I would be one of the first ones there and anchor well away from others. I will have my 3 daughters family and four grandkids. Your typical family with no loud noise except for kids squealing.

Others will come in and become disrespectful and raft or anchor within 25 feet. Guess what, I will be the one asked to move or get out. Some of the other boaters will tell the MP, you got the wrong guy. It doesn't matter, once they single someone out, that guy is gone.

So, how are the going to determine the good from the bad if they pass this law? Post an MP on Braun Bay all day? I'd rather have them going after the 'boneheads'.