What Speed Limit ????????

sunset on the dock · 11-09-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

hey sunset.. Good to see you...... (seriously)...you are one of the SL supporters that are actually here to debate without attacking everyone.

I have a question for you... Where did people get the alusion that GFB's all cost $200K and every owner has to have tons of $$$ or a trust fund?

I have been to the boat shows and seen Sailboats that cost way more then GFB. Mine cost nothing close to that. Given it was a lot closer when it was new but I wouldn't have been able to afford it....

What I am driving at is I believe there is an untrue stereo type that all GFBs and owners cost a huge amount of money or the person has huge amounts.... This just simply is not the case.

It would be like me saying that all party boaters don't have much $ because they cost less then fiberglass boats..

Just a point I was wondering if you could clairify for me.

Thanks...

PS. hope all is well.. Been off the forum for sometime.. busy weekend.. was at the Patriots game yesterday.. Great great time.. Beautiful weather as well. If I wasn't there it would have been a terrific day to go bombing down the broads.. J/K.... little razzing...

Hello...no you're right and I agree with your point. I just wanted to encourage people to be aware that the incomes of both SL supporters and opposers seem to vary considerably from the highs to the lows. I just hate to see the discussions turn into a class warfare issue because I don't believe it is such.
Glad you had good weather for the Pat's win. Looks like this week will be pretty good too...sunset

Kracken · 11-09-2009, 04:12 PM

Most of the “cowboys” are agreeable to a compromise. It has become clear that unlimited speeds on Lake Winnipesaukee are a thing of the past. The problem most boaters have with the 45/25 limit is it appears to be an arbitrary figure without supporting data. The limits were never debated, there wasn’t a compromise it was simply stated in a bill and adopted.

What we don’t want or need is a myriad of laws that sterilize every part of our lives. We don’t need warning signs on every product. We don’t need to tax sugary snacks and drinks to deter consumption. We don’t need every corner to be rounded and padded. We are heading down a path where everybody will be wearing helmets and water wings 24/7.

Years ago a national highway speed limit was adopted because it was determined that fuel consumption when up drastically when automobiles exceeded 55mph. during the first energy crisis it was understandable why they chose that speed as a national limit.

45/25 does not have clear reasoning behind it. Yes it is true, if no boat exceeded 5 mph there would be a lot fewer fatalities but why would one want to live their life in bubble wrap?

Prior to the speed limit, NH had laws in place that effectively promoted safe practices on the state's waterways. New Hampshire has one of the best water safety records in the country. We don’t need redundant laws. We all want the lake to be safe; however before enacting a law like 45/25 we need to do our due diligence to determine what is an acceptable safety limit. The voices of the Coast Guard and New Hampshire Marine Patrol should be the loudest in this endeavor.

OCDACTIVE · 11-09-2009, 04:23 PM

Very well put Kracken.!!!

I also would be willing to talk over a compromise but most peolpe are unwilling to do so.

Also, do not be so quick to dismiss unlimited. The law sunsets in one year, one month and 20 days...

You have to look at the history. Winnfabs wanted a two year test period on the "enitire" lake because the test zones yielded no data that speeding was an issue. This is what our state legislators said to us in support of the 2 year test. They said:

that the reason there was very limited data they claimed was "the fast boats just avoided the test zones" This was why they pushed for a 2 year test to prove that there are a lot more "speeders" on the lake and this test will prove that.

Well that didn't happen. Not 1 ticket has been written and paid on. Not One!!!

Now of course they twist their own reason why they requested it in the first place and say "see how well it is working" Totally going against why it was requested in the first place.

We can only hope that the state reps. see this as clearly as we do. That speed is not an issue on Lake Winni and that the law will simply sunset and we will be done with this.

11-09-2009, 04:23 PM	#3
OCDACTIVE Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro Posts: 1,045 Thanks: 444 Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts	Very well put Kracken.!!! I also would be willing to talk over a compromise but most peolpe are unwilling to do so. Also, do not be so quick to dismiss unlimited. The law sunsets in one year, one month and 20 days... You have to look at the history. Winnfabs wanted a two year test period on the "enitire" lake because the test zones yielded no data that speeding was an issue. This is what our state legislators said to us in support of the 2 year test. They said: that the reason there was very limited data they claimed was "the fast boats just avoided the test zones" This was why they pushed for a 2 year test to prove that there are a lot more "speeders" on the lake and this test will prove that. Well that didn't happen. Not 1 ticket has been written and paid on. Not One!!! Now of course they twist their own reason why they requested it in the first place and say "see how well it is working" Totally going against why it was requested in the first place. We can only hope that the state reps. see this as clearly as we do. That speed is not an issue on Lake Winni and that the law will simply sunset and we will be done with this. __________________ Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-09-2009, 04:12 PM	#2
Kracken Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Alton Posts: 223 Thanks: 46 Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts	Most of the “cowboys” are agreeable to a compromise. It has become clear that unlimited speeds on Lake Winnipesaukee are a thing of the past. The problem most boaters have with the 45/25 limit is it appears to be an arbitrary figure without supporting data. The limits were never debated, there wasn’t a compromise it was simply stated in a bill and adopted. What we don’t want or need is a myriad of laws that sterilize every part of our lives. We don’t need warning signs on every product. We don’t need to tax sugary snacks and drinks to deter consumption. We don’t need every corner to be rounded and padded. We are heading down a path where everybody will be wearing helmets and water wings 24/7. Years ago a national highway speed limit was adopted because it was determined that fuel consumption when up drastically when automobiles exceeded 55mph. during the first energy crisis it was understandable why they chose that speed as a national limit. 45/25 does not have clear reasoning behind it. Yes it is true, if no boat exceeded 5 mph there would be a lot fewer fatalities but why would one want to live their life in bubble wrap? Prior to the speed limit, NH had laws in place that effectively promoted safe practices on the state's waterways. New Hampshire has one of the best water safety records in the country. We don’t need redundant laws. We all want the lake to be safe; however before enacting a law like 45/25 we need to do our due diligence to determine what is an acceptable safety limit. The voices of the Coast Guard and New Hampshire Marine Patrol should be the loudest in this endeavor.

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Kracken For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (11-09-2009), chipj29 (11-10-2009), hazelnut (11-09-2009), OCDACTIVE (11-09-2009), Resident 2B (11-09-2009), Ryan (11-10-2009)

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (11-09-2009), Resident 2B (11-09-2009)