Ridiculous "No Wake" Declaration

Just Wonderin · 05-26-2006, 08:46 AM

This morning, a No Wake restriction was placed on Lake Winnipesaukee. But here is what I view as a ridiculous catch. You do not have to comply if you are more than 600 feet from the shoreline.

Then why declare No Wake at all. Does the water miraculously become completely flat after the wake rolls for 600 feet. The lake is still one foot over full lake. We are in a flood state. Don't they get that? Many docks are still under water, many of the trees close to the shoreline have partially submerged bases, with wind or boat wakes, these trees could very easily fall.

Whoever had the insight to make this declaration, should have had the courage to put the lake and shoreline first, and just declare a lake-wide no wake zone.

I think this is Laughable!

I'd like to hear other's views on this declaration.

05-26-2006, 08:46 AM	#1
Just Wonderin Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 169 Thanks: 55 Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts	Ridiculous "No Wake" Declaration This morning, a No Wake restriction was placed on Lake Winnipesaukee. But here is what I view as a ridiculous catch. You do not have to comply if you are more than 600 feet from the shoreline. Then why declare No Wake at all. Does the water miraculously become completely flat after the wake rolls for 600 feet. The lake is still one foot over full lake. We are in a flood state. Don't they get that? Many docks are still under water, many of the trees close to the shoreline have partially submerged bases, with wind or boat wakes, these trees could very easily fall. Whoever had the insight to make this declaration, should have had the courage to put the lake and shoreline first, and just declare a lake-wide no wake zone. I think this is Laughable! I'd like to hear other's views on this declaration. Last edited by Just Wonderin; 05-26-2006 at 08:51 AM. Reason: Added a sentence or two