Speed Limit
 

I am surprised there has not been any chatter regarding the proposed speed limit for Winni. The bill is listed on the NH General Court website, HB 162, sponsored by Rep Piliod from Belmont. It proposes a daytime speed limit of 45 mph & a nightime speed limit of 25mph.

Public Hearings?
 

Will there be any public hearings, committee meetings, etc for the public to give an opinion?

They say the best thing to do is just start some dialogue about the matter on this forum. The legislators will be watching to get a feel for public opinion on the subject. Posting an opinion here is probably more valuable than writing a letter to your rep.

Speed limits on the open water are rather silly in my opinion. There are plenty of places one would never go 45 MPH on the lake even if the law said it was OK to do so and there are plenty of places one could exceed 45 in a perfectly safe manner. I doubt a speed limit would make the lake safer than it is now. It would just give the Marine Patrol something else to concentrate on rather than trying to keep people safe.

It would also be quite tricky to accurately measure speed using handheld radar due to the way Doppler radar works and the fact that the vector of one boat relative to another, unlike a highway, is utterly random on the water.

Ah , government at work...protecting us from ourselves :laugh:
So now we who own "offshores" that can no longer go over 45(legally) can trade up to cruisers that kick up 3 and 4 foot wakes at 35 mph and be perfectly legal in most areas :idea:

We don't need the speed limit
 

I agree with the previous posting. 45 is way too fast in many situations, but on a sunny Tuesday, in mid-May, at 9AM, in the broads (and lots of other times and places) - there is no reason not to do 60+. So, 45 is an artificial number that is both too fast and too slow. A night time speed limit of 25 is not right either. Again, 25 is way too fast for some areas, but coming north from Wolfeboro in the broads, 25 can be too slow. In fact, some boats will plane bow high at 25, and conforming to the law would actually make visibility worse - and reduce safety. The laws should re-enforce a boater's responsibility to go a reasonable and proper speed at all times. Heck, the state is making everyone take a course in how to drive a boat - part of the course should be to recognize when its time to go fast, and when its time to go slow. I fear that this is feel-good legislation that gives the appearance of the warm blanket of safety, but does nothing except to encourage disrespect for the law.

I think the real purpose of the limit would be to chase the go boats off the lake and to the ocean. Dave and Geezer have hit it on the head, cruising even 35 or 40 say by an Eagle island on a busy day is dangerous. Most boaters do not have the skills to react quick enough.

The question that begs is it the speed or the number of boats that make the lake more dangerous? It really is a bit a both. If you chase away some boats that live for speed, that probably would drop the number of boats and speed and potentially make it safer. Who knows. Just a guess on the logic. :confused:

Before bashing anyone who even mentions speed limits it may be helpful to look at Lake George. They have a 45 mph speed limit. I'm sure there was a heated debate there but the speed limit advocates prevailed. Why? Couldn't the same reasons for putting a speed limit on Lake George apply to Lake Winni?

I'm not necessarily for a speed limit here but I think it would be nice to have a rational exchange of ideas about this instead of the usual hysteria from the performance boat owners. Is that possible on this forum?

So what about Lake George? If they passed a 45 mph speed limit there why not here?

Here Here Jan! I think that would be great. I would love to have a better understanding of why people oppose the limit. Is it just our natural desire for freedom, is it the feeling of going fast? I know myself, I could live with a limit. I'm one of those who doesn't ride faster than 45. My reason is when I'm on the lake, I want to really relax. With higher speeds, you do need to "work" a little more piloting as things as situations come up on you much faster. So that's my reason for not opposing it. However, I will fully respect those who do oppose the limit and would like to better understand their perspective.

Specifically for the reasons mentioned above, but also doing something just because NY does it, seems like a terrible reason to do something in NH.

There are already laws in place that govern boating, and common sense nicely covers any other aspects of the pasttime. If people obeyed the existing laws and used common sense, there would be no accidents. Maybe we need to punish folks for not using common sense rather than those that go fast where it's safe to do so... How about fines for running up on the Witches? You just know that anyone that would do that would be quite likely to do other dumb things.

Our society seems comfortable with punishing those who are perceived to be unsafe and having pity on those that do something really dumb. You see police issuing speeding tickets to automobile drivers all the time based on that notion that speed may lead to an accident, but they rarely write tickets after someone proves beyond all doubt that they were driving in an unsafe manner by actually having an accident.

I think we need to ask ourselves "why do we need a speed limit?", not "why not have one?"...

I feel compelled to point out the fact that my boat will barely break 45 MPH and I rarely go more than 35. I'm just opposed to redundant and useless laws in general.

nitey night!
 

I see boats out cruising at night and in the dark at speeds of 30-40 mph and assume they use a global positioning system to assist their normal eyeball vision for steering. The technology of gps has created a new boating venue on Winnipeaukee enabling boaters to cruise along up on plane in the night. With a lot less boat traffic out there at night, it's a good time to be out on the water and the stunning surroundings take on a whole new look.....night-time. Even a small rowboat w/ a two horse outboard is supposed to have the required red-green-white lights for the night and it can always be seen by an 8000lb-500hp 31' Baha Bandit that is night cruising up on plane at speeds of 30mph and faster. Wasn't there a night boating fatal accident in August 2002 involving a 31' go-fast and a 22' bow-rider where the driver claimed the white stern light of the other boat was not lit up?

Ben Franklin to the Rescue
 

I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said something like, "He who sacrifices a little freedom for a little security will get neither and deserve neither."

In my humble opinion, if the safe boating laws that we already have were merely enforced more effectively, there would be no need for additional ones. Unfortunately, I fear that the state would see a speed limit as another valuable revenue stream - the added "safety" would just be a nice bonus.

Let me start out by saying I have a boat that will do well over 45mph and I often do go over 45mph. In fact most times im doing over 45 mph.

Now onto my point. Using physics, you can determine that a boat weighing X and going X mph will take X amount of time and feet to come to a stop. If the X in mph is reduced then the distance and time it takes to stop a boat will decrease. This will undoubtablly reduce the # of accidents that happen when a boat is initailly going over 45mph. Im not saying im for a speed limit here but scientifically speaking speed limits reduce not only the # of accidents but also the severity of them.

As long as the Marine Patrol use common scense and arn't over the top with this, a speed limit will work fine. I dont think I have ever been pulled over and given a ticket unless I was going more then 10mph over the posted speed limit. If the Marine patrol use this same logic and only pull those over who are operating dangerously over the 45 mph limit, there wont be a problem

Just curious...
 

Why do "the few" have to rule "the many" in this country and state?

Pass your speed limit; but remember that life is choices and challenges. :D

The "wake" will make you think twice.

Unfortunately, it will be too late - your speed limit law will be a fact of life.

The upside is that "big boat" sales will increase because people with boats of less than 30 feet in length will not be able to enjoy a ride on the Lake.

Also, unfortunately, shorefront property owners will be observing the legal erosion of their assets.

Remember, the rule states 150 feet away. ;)

Also, take a wild guess as to why the Lake has experienced a "no-wake" limit. :rolleye2:

Perhaps, just perhaps, that is what is really needed to keep "the few" happy and content.

Just my opinion; yours may differ...

P.S.- Let us not forget Castle in the Clouds, the LRCT, and snowmobiles. :eek:

My 2 cents
 

I think you could argue both sides of this issue using logic, and the speed limit may not be the best solution to the problems that prompt it as a solution. As others have said on this thread, there are already a number of laws on the books that cover the problems sometimes created by speed. On a busy Saturday afternoon, it would never be prudent to go 40mph through FL2 and Eagle Island, but other times speed of 60 may be safe at other points on the lake.

The reckless nature of boaters who either are not paying attention to their fellow boaters or truly don't have a clue is what I see as the big problem. I would prefer to see NHMP be stricter with enforcing reckless operation violations than be forced to sit and run radar. Reckless operation is already on the books, has stiffer penalties than a simple safe passage violation or a speed violation would have, and I think it better addresses the unique issues of boating safety. In the Saturday afternoon scenario, I would argue that someone threading the needle in heavy boat traffic by light 2 at 40MPH would be operating recklessly, but putting in a 45MPH speed limit would in effect give the operator prima facia evidence for a reasonable defense. IMO, if Marine Patrol were to start handing out tickets that forced the operators to appear in court and explain to the Judge what they were doing, it would go a long way to improving the safety on the water. I think these problems boil down to a lack of common sense, which is impossible to legislate. But forcing someone to explain their actions to the Judge could go a long way towards fixing the problem.

Finally, putting in a speed limit may actually have the effect of generating higher speeds on the lake. Like others have said, many boaters don't go faster than 35 or so. But how many cars on the road travel below the speed limit? You may actually see inexperienced boaters thinking they need to be going 45, when for them 30 is much safer.

Contact info
 

Can anyone provide contact info for Pilliod Belk who is the sponsor of this House Bill? Thanks.

Boater education
 

I thought the mandatory boater education was the answer to the boating problems on Winni. Was/is this just feel good, apple pie and motherhood legislation? Has anyone asked Mr. Belk why he thinks this HB 162 bill is necessary and if so for him to provide data to support it? Seems like we are putting the cart before the horse.

If the traffic is that heavy shouldn't the 150' take effect and reduce the need for ANY speed limit :confused:
My boat's capable of well over 45 but most of the time going from Weirs beach to Wolfeboro or Alton Bay I run 2700to 3000 rpms and that gets me 45/50 mph , a very comfortable cruising speed for a boat my size. Most of my higher speeds are to race the sun down when returning home late or as a thunderstorm approaches. Now a speed limit would make me a criminal as well as many others who , I know , have done the same thing :( .
There's already laws in place to address the "unsafe" issues and apparently it's hard enough to keep track of these now.
To me it's , more government and one less freedom , more than anything else :(

I would rather see a horsepower limit than a speed limit. But I welcome a speed limit.

This argument that speed limits don't work and are not enforceable does not hold water. Many lakes, including NH lakes, have speed and horsepower limits and they work great.

At some point we need to tell people that this is a lake and not the ocean. Boats that have extreme speed, noise and wake should not be operated 150 feet from shore.

Athis lake I do not recall anytime that horsepower was found to be at blame for a boating accident, or that a speed of over 45 mph involved two boats in an accident. The current laws are quite sufficent. Ilove to sail but I also feel quit comfortable cruising over a 100mph. :confused:

Why assume this is just about boating safety?

It's also about erosion, excessive wake, noise pollution, water pollution, Loon nests, dock damage, swamped canoes, and a small child standing in 2 feet of water and being slammed into the rocks by the wake of a Carver that belongs in the Atlantic.

Just curious, some more...
 

If this is about "erosion, excessive wake, ..., Loon nests, dock damage, swamped canoes, and a small child standing in 2 feet of water and being slammed into the rocks by the wake of a .... that belongs in the Atlantic",
then, where does this leave the Mount, the Sophie C, and the Doris E?

Surely you do not wish for their retirement?!? :eek:

The Sophie and the Mount pass close to my place every day. The wake they put out is large. But the wake of performance boats and cabin cruisers is much worse.

This idea that the tour boats have the biggest wake just is not true. Plus there are only a few of them and they are operated by responsible professionals that know how to minimize their negative effects.

And tour boats provide lake access to tens of thousands that wouldn't have it otherwise. That's a fair trade for the minor inconvenience they create.

Why focus on speed?
 

Unfortunately, a speed limit won't solve most of these problems. I agree that there are many boats inappropriate for the lake being operated here, but putting in a speed limit won't help the issue of the giant Carver swamping canoes and endangering children- it can't go 45 anyway. And the offshore boats have smaller wakes when they are on plane than when they are bow up at slower speeds. I think having a speed limit would just be another unnecessary law that doesn't properly address the true underlying issues. I would much rather see a moratorium on large displacement craft.

Write to all of them
 

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/members/email.asp
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie/w...smyresults.asp
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie/whosmyleg/

Can't find Belk, just James Pilliod.

"Live Free or Die"
 

Let's enact more laws, everyone knows more regulation is better. Why 45 mph why not 30 or even 65? Why, because it is a number pulled out of someone's "head". Does Belmont even border the lake? I have a boat that will go 55 to 60 and sometimes I go that fast. Sometimes I am passed by boats going even faster. Every "irritation", I can't even call them close calls, I've experienced is at slower speeds caused by other boats travelling at slower speeds. I was able to correct the problem by slowing, stopping or changing course.

The speed limit is a joke, requested by people who think they are smarter than the rest. They think with their emotion rather than their brains. Most of the issues listed here (erosion, large wakes, bad behavior) will not be solved by a speed limit. Once again, if a careful thoughtful study was done, the Representative would find a speed limit is not necessary. Unfortunately some of our Representatives are not the brightest bulbs in the circuit.

I agree with you ITD , but it's hard to reason with people who want speed limits , even if only for their own selfish reasons. How do you make sense of the need to go fast. Just like the noise issue...there's no arguing for noise , only against it.Our government has reached a point , where if three people complain , they will change a law or make a new one regardless of what the other 4,346,328,210 people want :(
Some people would rather live in the 50's or 60's , granted it was a great time , but there's just no going back :yawn:
I just finished a 14 hour shift and the ol' bulb's getting pretty dim , so I'm gonna hit the sack :sleeping:

answer for Tyler
 

The sponsor of this bill is Rep. James Pilliod from Belmont. (The Belk you were refering to is an abbreviation for Belknap County, which he represents.)

His contact info is:

504 Province Rd, Belmont, NH 03220-5379

Slower is Better!!!!!
 

Funny how the same old folks bring up the same old argument about laws. Seems that the consistent thought is more laws are bad because there are A) enough laws on the books and B) you cannot enforce the new law. Based on that argument the government should not enact new legislation as society and technology changes. The issue of fast, ocean going boats on the lake was not an issue years ago because the problem did not exist. Today is different than it was years ago and society needs to amend laws to deal with the new reality.


The lake is without argument overcrowded and dangerous on any given summer weekend. There is not rational argument that can be made that someone needs to travel at a speed that is above 45 MPH. Where is anyone going that they need the extra speed? The speed is not about traveling to a destination it is about the thrill. IMHO!


Anyone can (and will) raise the argument that they have had problems with slow moving boats but statistically speed is a factor in any type of accident. Boater education cannot hurt but drivers’ education produces more than a few lunatics on the road. I understand that those lunatics on the road are probably breaking the law but at least there is a way to deal with them through legal remedies.


Anyway, slower is safer and more friendly to the lake and those that live, weekend, summer, fish, swim, wade, canoe etc. on it!

The safest thing to do is that no one use the lake, just look at it. Canoes are dangerous ( most deaths are attributed to capsising and fishing). No swimming that way no one will drown and contribute to bacteria. No powerboats so ther is no pollution or eroson ( but when you drive your car you might crash or pollute) maybe we can take it to the next step and rid all water fowl ( that means Loons too)

You cannot argue a speed limit without prejugdest!

Excess IS the problem
 

Yes there was. It occurred four days after my letter-to-the-editor appeared in the Granite State News. The letter was titled "Anarchy on Winnipesaukee". Both parties could have read it.

Afterwards, this Forum "lost" at least one poster's user-name that contained the word "Baja". The boats targeted are very mobile. If NY restricts them to 45 MPH, they just trailer to the nearest big lake that permits their excesses. (Oceans are dirty and might smudge their graphics). :rolleye1:

More importantly is that newspapers read here and archive the quotes.

You may be right. If you've visited these Big Boater websites, you'll see a disdain for regulation. (Some would call it arrogance). Boats that can exceed 45 MPH will choose "not to see" the MPs with their light flashing and sirens blaring.

Giant Carvers need to be hit in the wallet with ultra-big-time registration fees. "A cheap way to get Lakefront" isn't helping the Lake any, but it could fund Enforcement.

'Wonder why the "Big Boater" didn't use that among the defense arguments. (That the Big Boater didn't see the smaller boat's stern light because, "bow-up" he couldn't see over his own bow).

The Big Boater could have sued Baja for design insufficiencies, and "beat the rap". Ben wrote "essential freedoms". Excess is not an essential freedom.

The Number of accidents
 

Can anyone find out the exact number of accidents involving 2 or more boats on Winni last year, and for that matter the last several years.I have no idea where to get that info. For all this talk of over crowdedness (is that a word lol?) im guessing the number is relitivly low. Im willing to guess most accidents involving 2 or more boats happen at speeds much lower then the proposed 45mph. Its not speed thats the main factor.. its boaters that dont have a clue on how to run a boat properly. Distraction in my opinion is the #1 cause of boating accidents. All this argument about what people precieve as "ocean going boats".. Who says they are only for the ocean??? When you buy one does it say..... only use in the ocean? ( I dont own an "ocean going boat"). One poster wants to impliment a horse power restriction. Why ? What will that accomplish? A 15' boat with a 90hp motor will go just as fast as a 20' with a 150hp or a 30' with a 250hp

John, Don't waste your breath here. "Rationality" has no place in this string. This string is just for people who either own or profit from monster boats or who like to disagree. Canoes and loons? Luckily, few of these people live up here, vote up here, or have any serious influence. In time, those of us who do not own forty footers will be able to use the lake again.

The tide is turning in NH
 

I moved up from Massachusetts several years ago in order to get away from the liberalism that's prevalent there. It's that attitude that the government knows what's best for us that was not present in the "Live Free or Die state, which caused me to leave Mass. However, I fear that the influx of Mass residents that came here possibly to escape the liberalism is changing NH forever. Once here, I think they fall into old habits and look toward the government for direction, guidance and rules in their lives. I think a perfect example is the fact that NH voted for Kerry in the election. How much more liberal can you get? I think the idea of a speed limit on the lake is rediculous and will just be the start of more rules and less freedom. Marine Patrol does not have the resources to enforce the rules as they stand, so what makes everyone think that enacting a new speed limit will save us from ourselves? The need to enforce the rules that are in place now.

WP,
Seems an interesting switch to take the side of the jet-setters and act as if you are speaking for us old-time locals. Especially when, by virtue of being a recent transplant to this state, you have no basis for representing us. Ninety-nine percent of these performance boats are owned by out-of-staters (no, I don't have evidence of that). It's the locals and old-timers who are having the lake taken away from us in recent years. Claiming that our desire to start using the lake again is somehow being "liberal" and implying that it is these rich kids with the speed boats who represent the traditional conservative values of this state is a real stretch. Excessive goverment happens when the things we own are taken away from us by new laws and regulations, not when they are given back by trying to keep things the way they alwasy have been. Asking our elected representatives to protect us from this recent influx of out-of-state values is not in conflict with traditional NH values, it is right in line with them.

No Right
 

You talk about rights, but there is no RIGHT to operate any size boat at any speed on a NH lake, anymore then there is a right to operate any vehicle at any speed on NH highways.

We are a society of laws, and if the majority want a speed or horse power limit on the lake then that is what they will have.

Enforcement is not the issue. Safety is not the issue. Majority rule is the issue.

Things are getting out of hand on the lake and the majority want a change. If you think the majority want more big loud boats on the lake then you are out of touch with the community.

This law or one like it WILL pass. Perhaps not this year or the next but if you think the status will remain quo then you have your head in the sand.

Next time you paint your boats use salt resistant paint.

Hearing is next week
 

The hearing for this bill is next Wednesday, January 19, 2005 at 11:00 am in Room 305 of the Legislative Office Building in Concord. I'll be there in support of NO SPEED LIMIT :D. We need more help, so if you are against this please try to show up and stand up for your RIGHTS!

I will be there
 

Thanks for the info SeaPlane Pilot. This will never pass. To bad we have to go through this every year.

Please direct me to the poll or study that says the majority wants a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, I'll bet you'll find it at the same place as the majority that wanted rigime change in the US, NOWHERE. Once again, a speed limit won't solve any of the complaints listed in this forum.

Remove "Washington's" in the quote below and I'm afraid you'll begin to see NH direction..... I hope I'm wrong.........

"Sadly, commitment to principle has been missing in Washington's politics for quite some time now. Ronald Reagan's summary of how the government thinks -- 'If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it' -- remains very much alive today." --The Heritage Foundation's Ed Feulner