Speed Limit

[GWC...]

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.

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.

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.

[lakershaker]

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.

[Tyler]

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

[Island Girl]

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.

[Tyler]

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.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by lakershaker

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.

If the traffic is that heavy shouldn't the 150' take effect and reduce the need for ANY speed limit
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

[Bear Islander]

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.

[overlook]

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.

[Bear Islander]

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.

[GWC...]

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?!?

[Bear Islander]

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.

[lakershaker]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

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.

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.

[ITD]

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.

[Cal]

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
I just finished a 14 hour shift and the ol' bulb's getting pretty dim , so I'm gonna hit the sack

[Sally]

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

[JDeere]

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!

[overlook]

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!

[rickstr66]

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

[frank m.]

Originally Posted by JDeere

There is not rational argument that can be made that someone needs to travel at a speed that is above 45 MPH.

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.

[Seaplane Pilot]

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.

[Fat Jack]

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.

[Bear Lover]

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.

[Seaplane Pilot]

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 . We need more help, so if you are against this please try to show up and stand up for your RIGHTS!

[Tyler]

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

[Fat Jack]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

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 . We need more help, so if you are against this please try to show up and stand up for your RIGHTS!

I heard on the news that there is so much interest that they are splitting up the hearing into two separate sessions. Those who are in favor of the bill and a speed limit should show at the above time. Those that are against should show up at 2PM.

[Island Girl]

http://www4.citizen.com/January2005/..._01.15.05a.asp

[Paugus Bay Resident]

Regardless of your position on this, I too urge all of you to write your reps and senator. The ones I've written to have been very responsive, and echo the sentiments that upthesaukee received.

Even if you aren't a "resident", I think they would welcome your opinion.

By the way, here's a link to boating accident statistics (USCG)

USCG 2003 statistics show that the top three causes of boating accidents were operator inattention, careless / reckless operation and operator inexperience. These causes equaled over 43% of all reported accidents. Only 10% or so were caused by excessive speed (which could be 15mph depending on the circumstances). Of the total number of fatalities, 82% were not wearing life jackets. Alcohol was involved in 31% of all boating fatalities. Based on the statistics, it seems that there are other areas of significance to focus on.

[Rose]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

USCG 2003 statistics show that the top three causes of boating accidents were operator inattention, careless / reckless operation and operator inexperience. These causes equaled over 43% of all reported accidents.

Since many accidents were caused by operator inattention, carelessness or inexperience, how do people feel about an operator's license (not a certificate) in which an individual would need to pass a basic boating operation test as well the current written test? I'm not necessarily advocating this, just curious. I know I would feel more confident behind the wheel if I took a few lessons.

Rose

[CEP]

I don't think that speed limits and or driving license would be needed.
Most people I know, that operate boats on the lakes, already have a drivers license. However, we all know how some handle themselves on the roads.
Education and Experiance is needed! We all need to have a different attitude tords operating on the lakes. Slow down in tight situations, and be alert, and curtious to the other guy near you. Safety for yourself and the loved ones and passengers you have on board.
God knows we have enough regulations on the books today, we need no more.
A safe cruise, is a good cruise. All's well, that ends well!

CEP

[JG1222]

Paugus Bay Resident posted a great link to statistical data on accidents. Although I personally feel that you can’t address a speed limit until “on the books” laws are better enforced, the statistic that you can’t ignore (and in my opinion is the most important) is the following:

Of the fatalities in 2003, when the status of “Boat Operator Instruction” was known, 77% of the fatalities were because the parties involved had “None”.

[ITD]

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

[phoenix]

should we also get rid of all speed limits on roads. it seems that some limit is logical . Maybe the debate should be about the number not whether we should have any rules

[Bear Lover]

ITD

Your missing the point. A speed limit is not what the majority want. What they want is those "big, loud, gas guzzling, mine is bigger than yours" boats off of the lake. A speed limit is what they will use as the way to do it. Nobody is going to spend a small fortune to keep a muscle boat on a lake with a 45 mph limit.

And after the speed limit passes they will want a horse power limit, or some other method, to get the cabin cruisers off the lake.

If you really think it can't happen read the list of NH lakes with speed and or horsepower limits. It's about 1 in 3.

[Tyler]

that supports this. Unfortunately we go through this every year. This will never pass and those who want it know it. It is simple feel good legislation wishfull thinking.

As I said earlier I thought the mandatory boater education was supposed to help this situation. Was that just another feel good bill that was passed???

[PaulS]

I think the only thing that most people can agree on is that we want courtesy. The best way to get that, is to give it. A 20' runabout going 30 mph past someone in a canoe fishing on a quiet morning, even at 150', is going to be more annoying than a cigarette boat going 70 mph across the broads with no one else in site. Regardless of the boat type: jetski, cruiser, kayak, runabout, or "offshore", each can be driven in a way to not bother others, or with total disregard for anyone and everyone. After about 5 posts, these threads get pretty damned repetative, with not much new information added. A little courtesy goes a long way. Climbing off my soapbox now...

[Just Sold]

With all the discussion pro and con here is my 2 cents.

A speed limit may have some and I say some merit but is it the only answer?

With the various threads on "Go Fast", Off Shore, Ocean Boats, Large Cruisers etc have we forgotten that the PWC can achieve speeds in excess of 60 MPH? So it is not the size or HP of the boat that can get up an go like H--- across any body of water.

My current boat cannot make it to 45MPH. When I bought a previous new boat back in 93 I declined the larger engine because I "gave up drag racing". But that was a personal choice. Don't get me wrong I like speed but there is a time and place for it. That is what NASCAR provides for car enthusiasts at NHIS and other smaller tracks around New England. Is the lake an open race track? Some believe that is the case so we are seeing a way to control it being put forth in the NH Legislature.

I am not convinced that a speed limit is the right answer but it may be the only choice unless someone can come up with a better one.

The whole situation on Winni and much smaller lakes is the same.
It is just proportional as it relates to the size of the lake not the individual boats. I want everyone to enjoy the lakes in our wonderful state and we have to do it safely and fairly.

I feel that rude and dangerous operation is the real root of the problem but how do we get that resolved? Do we put 10 MP's to every 100 boats on our waters? That is ludicris of course.

I do not have a definitive answer but we all should look at the whole picture on both sides of the issue and addresses the real problem as seen by a majority of us. Let the legislators know your feelings. If you cannot got to the hearing send a letter. It is your right to express your opinion.

Sorry I did 25 cents worth not 2.

[Rattlesnake Gal]

Be sure to take this poll on lake speed limit!

[upthesaukee]

Please see the following email sent to the legislation's author Represtative James Pilliod MD from Belmont, with carbon copies to the other legislators representing Alton. I also forwarded this to Representative Currier, vice-chairman of the committee conducting the hearing urging that the legislation not be passed.

I hope others will take the time to contact the committee if they can not attend the hearing, and also contact the legislators from your area.

Dear Representative Pilliod:

As an avid boater and full time resident of the Lakes Region (Alton Bay), I feel compelled to write to you as the bill's sponsor, with carbon copies to the other Representatives and the Senator for my town.

There is no question that Lake Winnipesaukee can get crowded in the summertime. There is also no question that there are some boaters who will drive their boats too fast for conditions.

My concern is that you are proposing legislation establishing a speed limit that will be next to impossible to enforce. In the vehicular world, we have radar equipped police cars with officers trained in the use of the radar equipment. We also have unmarked police cars that can blend into the flow of traffic and "clock" a speeding automobile.

My boat on its best day is capable of reaching near the forty mile per hour speed mark. I normally cruise somewhere between twenty-five and thirty miles per hour. What I do not find is that I am constantly being "blown out of the water" by boats operating at a high rate of speed. What I do find is other boats that do not adhere to established regulations, most notably the "150 foot" rule.

A new regulation is not what is needed on Lake Winnipesaukee, especially one that is virtually unenforceable. What is needed is more education and more enforcement of existing regulations.

What I find very disappointing is that you are not sponsoring any companion legislation that would allow the Department of Safety's Marine Patrol additional funds for the purchase of radar guns (several hundred dollars each, I'm sure), additional funds for the training of Marine Patrol officers in the use of the radar guns, and additional funds for additional personnel to enforce this legislation.

New Hampshire's money can be better spent by increasing boater education and the ability for the Marine Patrol to better enforce the regulations that are already on the books.

In a nutshell: EDUCATE, not regulate.

Representative Pilliod, I urge you to withdraw your legislation.

To Representatives Boyce, Allen, Clark, Millham, Thomas, and Whalley: I urge you to vote "No" if this bill makes it out of committee and onto the floor.

To Senator Boyce: I urge you to contact Representative Pilliod, asking him to withdraw the legislation and to contact the other Representatives from Alton to vote "No" if this bill makes it to the floor.

To all addresses, I thank you for your time and your consideration.


Signed electronically


David M. Cumming

Thanks to Island Girl for the good links to the NH Legislative sites. Just Sold, looks like we are on about the same page here regarding contacting your legislators. If we just sit hear on the forum and gripe, those making the decisions will not know our opinion. Pro or con, contact them before the hearing!!!!!!

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by Bear Lover

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.

With all due respect I think you are completely wrong with your "majority rules" issue. Certainly in some aspects, as elections, that is what the outcome shall be based on, however, our society is also based on personal freedoms. Our country was based, and fought for, in the belief of personal freedoms. We have a Bill of Rights that is about freedom.

I do not particularly care for sailboats, but I will certainly defend someone's right to own and enjoy it. Where do I have the right to say that someone else may not enjoy their passion, just because I enjoy something different? I don't, and neither do you.

Someone can be just as irresponsible in a canoe, as one of those "ceegar" boats. This entire issue of the lake is an issue of responsibility and accountability for one's own actions irregardless of what type of boat they may choose to enjoy.

If someone goes by you in one of those boats that you obviously detest so much, how long do you really hear it, thirty seconds, maybe a minute, then it's gone. The problem, Bear Lover, is that your own distaste for this particular type of boat has brought you to the point of believing in the concept of "if I don't like it, you can't do it". That is wrong. And it would be just as wrong if the person operating that big loud boat wanted to ban you from the lake. Life is about compromise. And compromise is the only concept that will keep this speed issue from becoming very ugly. We don't need speed limits, what we need is for people to be courteous and respectful of each other, and recognize that everyone has the same right to enjoy the lake in the manner that they may choose, not a choice forced upon them by others. The next time you want to talk about banning a certain type of boat, think of how you would feel if someone wanted to ban you, just because they did not like the vessel that you chose to own and enjoy.

Of all the different groups of boaters, in my neck of the woods, it is the "Offshore" crowd that is without question the most courteous on the water. Our local law enforcement will attest to that.

The "Offshore" community has raised millions and millions of dollars for charities via sanctioned races and Poker Runs, and Fun Runs. They are "good people". Someday you might consider stepping down from your soapbox and actually try to get to know some, or better yet, take a ride in one of those boats. I have not yet met anyone who has not enjoyed it.

Remember, do unto others.......FormulaOutlaw

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by JDeere

[font=Times New Roman][size=3]

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!

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

I must have missed something in "Life 101". Since when is a "thrill" a bad thing? If you have reached a point in your life that either nothing thrills you, or you have no interest in thrill, I feel very sorry for you. Thrill is a good thing, whether it is boating, or going to a good movie.

It's all about the fun of something. Slower does not automatically equate to safer. I'd trust a sober experienced Captain running 100 mph with a vessel that is capable of safely doing that speed, before I'd trust a drunk running 25 mph in an eighteen foot bowrider.

It's all about responsibility and accountability for one's actions. It's just that simple. Nothing more.

[Bear Lover]

FormulaOutlaw

You have no idea what my experiences or motivations are. If you read my posts again you will find that I never gave my opinion of the speed limit. I was giving my take on why some people want a speed limit and predicting what the outcome will be if it passes. You don't have to want a speed limit in order to realize that it is coming. Dozens of NH lakes have been given speed and horsepower limits in the last few years. It's folly to assume that Winnipesaukee is immune.

The only comment I made on the subject was that things are getting out of hand on the lake, and I stand by that.

And I don't need you to tell me about the Offshore community. In the eighties I crewed the "Piccadilly Filly". So I think you are the one that is on the soap box.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by Bear Lover

FormulaOutlaw

You have no idea what my experiences or motivations are. If you read my posts again you will find that I never gave my opinion of the speed limit. I was giving my take on why some people want a speed limit and predicting what the outcome will be if it passes. You don't have to want a speed limit in order to realize that it is coming. Dozens of NH lakes have been given speed and horsepower limits in the last few years. It's folly to assume that Winnipesaukee is immune.

The only comment I made on the subject was that things are getting out of hand on the lake, and I stand by that.

And I don't need you to tell me about the Offshore community. In the eighties I crewed the "Piccadilly Filly". So I think you are the one that is on the soap box.

You are correct, I do not, and don't particularly want to know, your motivations. I just read and understand the English language reasonably well. Comparing Winnipesaukee with the small lakes that have horsepower limits is rather foolish. Winnipesaukee is not a small lake.

I read what you wrote thoroughly and congratulations you made your feelings known without "committing" by statement. You must be either a lawyer or politician. Doesn't matter.

And if standing on a soapbox protects the interests of all involved, then I'm not coming down. The difference between us is that I understand the rights of others are just as important as my own rights. Your parting shot about the paint pretty much lets anyone understand where you are coming from.

Crewing for a race team twenty years ago means little in 2005. Like I stated, few groups of people have done as much for charities, mostly helping children, as the "offshore" group. As I sit on two "Board of Directors" for offshore groups, help produce two national boat races, help produce and have personally produced poker runs, all in helping either the Suncoast Foundation for the Handicapped, Inc., the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, and PAL, I have a reasonable idea of what I'm speaking of.

This entire issue on "the lake" is still and will always be about responsibility and accountability, something you cannot legislate. Education and awareness is the key, and next time out, wave at an offshore boat, you'll get a wave back.

[HUH]

Originally Posted by Bear Lover

FormulaOutlaw

You have no idea what my experiences or motivations are. If you read my posts again you will find that I never gave my opinion of the speed limit. I was giving my take on why some people want a speed limit and predicting what the outcome will be if it passes. You don't have to want a speed limit in order to realize that it is coming. Dozens of NH lakes have been given speed and horsepower limits in the last few years. It's folly to assume that Winnipesaukee is immune.

The only comment I made on the subject was that things are getting out of hand on the lake, and I stand by that.

And I don't need you to tell me about the Offshore community. In the eighties I crewed the "Piccadilly Filly". So I think you are the one that is on the soap box.

You keep talking about the other NH lakes that have speed limits.. This is totaly irrelivant to the situation on Winni.. The BIG LAKE is just that its ten times the size of the next largest lake in NH..
Shall I go dig up the numbers

[JDeere]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by FormulaOutlaw

I must have missed something in "Life 101". Since when is a "thrill" a bad thing? If you have reached a point in your life that either nothing thrills you, or you have no interest in thrill, I feel very sorry for you. Thrill is a good thing, whether it is boating, or going to a good movie.

Nothing wrong thrill seeking until it infringes on other people. Your post makes it clear that you think about your first otherwise you would not have felt it necessary to take a shot at someone. If you need speed to get your thrill then by all means go out and get them but not when you put others at risk but it appears that that is not an issue to you…………..hence we need laws to make you the outlaw you wannabe.

[Audiofn]

[QUOTE=JDeere]

Nothing wrong thrill seeking until it infringes on other people. Your post makes it clear that you think about your first otherwise you would not have felt it necessary to take a shot at someone. If you need speed to get your thrill then by all means go out and get them but not when you put others at risk but it appears that that is not an issue to you…………..hence we need laws to make you the outlaw you wannabe.

This is were I think it gets touchy and the two sides have a real hard time seeing any middle ground. However the speed issue as I have said I think is a different one then noise issue, OR are you trying to figure that if a boat can not go over 45 that the loub boats will leave? Back door politics? That is sure what it feels like to me. I am still waiteing for any evidence that speed has a direct cause and effect on accidents as the evidence from the coast guard seems to indicate otherwise. Accidents from my checking around seems to be more related to Intoxication, lack of knowledge, not paying attention, and other things but NOT speed. So again were is your data that shows that those of us driving fast are the cause of all the accidents on the water?

[rickstr66]

Several of us have asked the pro speed limit crowd to post some data on speed causing accidents on Lake Winnipesaukee. None has been posted because it doesn't exsist. Alcohol and stupidity are the 2 reasons for most accidents. Last I checked you can't outlaw stupidity. These pro speed limit people are the same ones that have a house on the lake but go to every town meeting and oppose somoene else building a house on the lake, or they have a dock and protests their new neighbors dock. Once they have it, they dont want anyone else to have it.
One could argue that since Winni is such a big lake, it's the small bout that dont belong. Get rid of all the small, underpowered boats and the overcrowding will be solved. Let the small boat go use a smaller lake or pond. If your boat isnt at least 17' long and have at least 100 hp then you cant be on Winni period. Hey the more I type of this , the better it sounds!!! In reality this doesnt sound good at all. I would never want to limit anyones access to such a beautiful place. Its there for all of us to use and enjoy.

[Aubrey]

It's incredible how many people are stuck on the idea that you can't pass a law you can't enforce. That never stopped them before. The 55 and 65 mph speed limits on 93 are broken by at least 2 out of 3 cars on the road. Drive down 93 at the limit and see how many cars you pass and how many cars pass you.

And a MP officer might not be able to look at a boat and know if it's going 45 or 55. But they certainly will be able to look at a boat going 90 and tell it's breaking the law. Remember an officers estimate can be used for a speeding ticket, no radar gun is required.

I'm not in favor of a 45mph speed limit. But a 65mph limit like on 93 is OK with me. If you need to go 90 perhaps you should find a bigger body of water with less traffic.

Live Free or Die is a statement against political slavery. Not an justification for irresponsible or inconsiderate behavior.

FormulaOutlaw is not a member of the lake community. He has ridiculed this web site and the people in it. I doubt if he has contributed to the upkeep of this site. I think he should go away and stay away.

[phoenix]

well said Aubrey. I also think the real debate should be the actual speed limit not whether there should be any limit . 45 is likely too low but 90 is too high.

[Islander]

Great idea Aubrey!

65 would be fine with me.

And FormulaOutlaw should go insult children somewhere else IMHO.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by Islander

And FormulaOutlaw should go insult children somewhere else IMHO.

The only "children" I may have insulted are posting in this Forum.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by FormulaOutlaw

The only "children" I may have insulted are posting in this Forum.

I'm afraid Formula Outlaw has a point. We are just children at this Forum, and need lots of "Education and Awareness".

On the other hand, at the Big Boater Forum, "Outlaws" have to pay for "Adult Content".

I'm so confused

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

I'm not in favor of a 45mph speed limit. But a 65mph limit like on 93 is OK with me. If you need to go 90 perhaps you should find a bigger body of water with less traffic.

See for me or anyone like myself to to get "onboard" with this legislation I want to see evidence that speed limits have lowered the accident rate. I want to see that speed boats are in more accidents then smaller boats. You say this is about safty but you keep coming after only the fastest boats on the lake. The reality of it is that people with speed boats tend to have less accidents per capita then others. Let me give you an example. Joe X speed boater is running up the lake at 60mph. Sam Smith is running up the lake at the same time in the same direction parrallell and slightly in front of Joe X. Sam Smith does not look and makes a sharp turn in front of Joe X and there is a collision. Who gets blamed for the accident in the public opinion? Who's fault is it really.... I say it is Sam Smith for not taking caution before making a turn. Most of you seem to say that it is Joe X because he has a speed boat and all speed boat people should be off the lake

Some one earlier stated that they saw a speed boat go btwn them and a couple kids on a Hobie at a very high rate of speed. Well if that person was under 200 feet from the Hobie then I say that they deserved a fine and a good talking to by the MP's and even tossed off the lake for the day to think about thier stupidity. However if they are over the 200 feet then they are plenty far away to safly pass at speed.

So please show me the evidence that says that adding a speed limit will make the lake safer. Show me the evidence that the cause of all the accidents on the lake are due to anything more then Stupidity and lack of knowledge.

Oh and by the way when there was a boat that sank in the 1000 Islands, the owner died but there was one other person that we found swimming. It was ONLY speed boats that were there (10 of us) to pull the girl out of the water and to assist the Coast Guard in finding us. If it was not for Speed boats, and the fact that we are typically much more observent then most, the Girl would have died as well.

[Audiofn]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

It's incredible how many people are stuck on the idea that you can't pass a law you can't enforce. That never stopped them before. The 55 and 65 mph speed limits on 93 are broken by at least 2 out of 3 cars on the road. Drive down 93 at the limit and see how many cars you pass and how many cars pass you.

What we are saying is that the laws on the books are sufficient as they are. They protect everyone quite well. Your wake is your own responsibility, if you are on plane with in 200 feet of another boat you are pulled over. Enforce the laws that are there and they cover all the issues that you are talking about. To put a law on the books because you guys think that it will get us speed boaters to leave is unfair. As for the speed limit on the highways, well that kind of helps to make my point. Cars are built better then your fathers Model T. They can go faster safer. Try and lower the speed limit on the highways to 45 and see what you get for a response. I bet it is a lot harsher then what we are saying.

I always find it amazing that a Chris Craft can go past with open headers WOT and people will say wow. Then when a speed boat goes past with mufflers they go noisy pieces of .......

Jon

[Aubrey]

Jon

I understand your point.

But what I am saying is that 65 miles an hour is fast enough on lake Winnipesaukee. And that if you want to go faster you should go somewhere else. This is just my opinion, but quite frankly I don't care about accident statistics. This isn't just about safety.

Call it noise, call it erosion, call it my right to peacful enjoyment of the lake. Call it whatever you like, there is a limit and it has been passed.

What speed do you think is to much? If you had to pick a number what would it be?

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

Jon

This isn't just about safety.

Call it noise, call it erosion, call it my right to peacful enjoyment of the lake. Call it whatever you like, there is a limit and it has been passed.

What speed do you think is to much? If you had to pick a number what would it be?

There is no speed that is too much, its all relevant to the particular boat. We already have laws on the books about wakes (which are known to contribute to erosion). We already have laws on the books about noise (certain levels based on year of manufacturing), laws about safe passage (i.e. speed), laws about drinking and boating, laws about anchoring, laws about right of way..........adding another law isn't necessarily going to solve anything.

MP has limited resources, and limited funding from the state - without additional funding and manpower it can be difficult to enforce these laws. Part of the responsibility (and the larger part at that) lies on the shoulders of the operator of the vessel. Boater Education!!! If the operators learn these laws they will be aware of right from wrong, and hopefully exercise the 'right' more than the 'wrong'.

I fail to understand your point on how exactly a speed limit law is going to satisfy your 'right to peaceful enjoyment of the lake'. Quite frankly the safety of all boaters lives are by far much more important and significant than peaceful enjoyment. When a boater operates in an unsafe manner, it not only endangers their boat and its passengers, but the occupants of other boats that come in contact with it. Most of all, it endangers the lives of the Fire Fighters who have to come to the rescue / recovery. This is where it really matters -- an uneducated operator can inflict hardship on so many other than themselves, they can risk the lives of innocent people and risk the lives of our fire fighters all because they choose to be ignorant. And yes, being ignorant is a choice.

Why are we such a lazy society - when we can't do something ourselves, we want the government to make a law which will force us to do what we could have done all by ourselves in the first place???????

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Outlaw

There is no speed that is too much

This is where you lose me. And I think this is where you lose most people. We think there is a speed that is too much! 200 mph is too fast for this lake, PERIOD.

I don't care how you want to argue it, there are limits.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

.
FormulaOutlaw is not a member of the lake community. He has ridiculed this web site and the people in it. I doubt if he has contributed to the upkeep of this site. I think he should go away and stay away.

No, I am not a member of your community, but I am an avid member of the "boating community". And in the grand picture, your community is part of the overall "boating community".

I have in no way ridiculed this Forum. I have ridiculed the "I don't like it so you can't do it" concept that is so prevalent here.

The solution to this situation is education and awareness, something I will keep bringing up. Why? Because it is true. It's just that simple.

If it makes you feel any better, I believe I have gotten my point across. I will keep checking back to see how this Thread plays out and unless someone tries to come after me, I don't plan on posting much. I've said what I have to say.

But I'll be watching.......................................... ................................

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by FormulaOutlaw

The solution to this situation is education and awareness, something I will keep bringing up. Why? Because it is true. It's just that simple.

Thank you FormulaOutlaw - well said. I with you on that one. EDUCATION - the more you know and understand, the more empowered you are.

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

FormulaOutlaw is not a member of the lake community. He has ridiculed this web site and the people in it. I doubt if he has contributed to the upkeep of this site. I think he should go away and stay away.

What exactly is your definition of "a member of the lake community"?

[b8tcaster]

Ocasionally when the lake is calm enough and I get a big head I have tried to see if my bass boat can keep up with one of you guys. Seems I always get humbled pretty quickly...lol. Maybe this summer with an extra 50 hp I might have a chance

[Aubrey]

Originally Posted by Outlaw

What exactly is your definition of "a member of the lake community"?

FormulaOutlaw is not a member of the lake community by any reasonable definition! He lives and boats in Florida. He does claim that many years ago he lived in Maine and visited Winnipesaukee a few times. However he displays no knowledge of the lake. By his own admission he is here to try and prevent a speed limit and that he joined here only to vote in the poll.

He is an activist for the Offshore boating community.

He has been rude and insulting to the board and it's members and their children.

by Formula Outlaw

I just went into the first site to lurk. One rubberhead states that anyone going over 45 "isn't going that fast to get somewhere, but for the thrill of it". What in the hell is wrong with getting a thrill outta life????? They need to put that idiot in a box, put it in the ground, and throw the dirt on it.

It's bad having a thrill? That's one of the absolute stupidest moronic things I have ever read. Thank God I live down here. I couldn't take those azzholes.

______________________________________

No kidding.......going through that Forum last night it was so "Green" my computer felt like it had Kryptonite around it. This one guy who owns, according to others, the biggest dump of a marina on the lake, is juming on the "let's clean up the lake" bandwagon. Wants to put PortaPotties so the ice fisherman won't piss in the lake.

I wonder how he'll train the fish to use the PortaPotties?

I can only imagine the site of all those "weenies" whining about how only THEIR interest in the lake is important. "BearLover" is my favorite. I wonder what his/her kids look like?

I think a person that lives, works or visits the lake area on a regular basis could be considered a member of the lake community. Somebody that MIGHT have visited here 20 years ago is not.

[DoTheMath]

Aubrey / Acres Per Second ~

I not only happen to be a "member of the lake community" (been on the lake for 36 years, we own a house on the water and a boat that is considerably faster then 45 mph.). I also happen to be a PROUD paying member of "that other site" you have spent your time bashing - and from the looks of it, you are sadly mis-informed, on many levels. I am sure - after reading this thread - you have no idea of the make up of that site or it's members, and thus should not be commenting negatively on it! The support that the members on it get from each other as well as the staff that runs it is unparalled, anywhere. I really wonder what it is that makes you so unrelenting on others life styles and preferences as to how they spend their time? I personally know Audiofn, have boated with him and you would be hard-pressed to find a more stand up guy, not to mention a more responsible boater, at ANY speed! He is a great example of the make up of that "other site" and the type of boater you'll find over there. We have people from all walks of life, law enforcement, construction workers, lawyers, sales guys and some of the most respected and esteemed names you'll find in the boating industry.

I grew up on this lake, spent summers working for local marinas and doing my part to make a difference, I consider a number of the current owners good friends of mine. If someone knocked your preference for boating I am confident that you would come to the table on the defensive and stand up for yourself? Well, it looks like you might have gone and done the same with a couple of our guys and didn't like the results!? Not a very "upstanding" thing to have done, do you think? I wasn't going to chime on on this thread, but I feel strongly about the subject matter and stronger about my fellow "mafiOSO-women-degrading" boaters .

It is too bad that you feel the need to slam someone that you have no clue as to what they are really like. We are all boaters - and are in it for the love of the sport. Just because we drive fast boats and they might be a bit louder then your average Sea Ray, doesn't make it wrong no matter who you (think) you are. Really, expand your horizons a bit and be less narrow minded - you'll find that there is a whole other world out there and some great people in it, including the "outlaws" over on OSO.

-Mark-

[Island Lover]

Great post Mark. But it will be more helpfull if you respond to the questions at hand.

Is Formula Outlaw a member of the lake community?

Why is he here?

Did he trash this forum and its members?

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by Aubrey

FormulaOutlaw is not a member of the lake community by any reasonable definition! He lives and boats in Florida. He does claim that many years ago he lived in Maine and visited Winnipesaukee a few times. However he displays no knowledge of the lake. By his own admission he is here to try and prevent a speed limit and that he joined here only to vote in the poll.

He is an activist for the Offshore boating community.

He has been rude and insulting to the board and it's members and their children.

I think a person that lives, works or visits the lake area on a regular basis could be considered a member of the lake community. Somebody that MIGHT have visited here 20 years ago is not.

I apologize for this question, but I haven't been on this site for a few months, just been too darn busy, but I believe I missed the poll for Lake Community Members. It's okay to not agree with everyone, that we certainly know is impossible. People that visit here on what ever frequency, who pay for services of all kinds, that money is in direct relation to a business in the lake community and some small portion of it that is retained after taxes, is contributed to the lake community. In a way I would think these visitors are members of the lake community, since this lake community thrives on tourism. Many of the forum members live elsewhere from the lake and this forum allows them to stay in touch with the area when they can't physically be here. These are people who have an interest in the lake and the community for a variety of different reasons regardless of the frequency of their visits to the area.

What I've gathered from FormulaOutlaw's posts, the Readers Digest version, is he is a proponent of education. Education is a good thing, that's what separates the informed from the uninformed.

[DoTheMath]

RG & Outlaw... the exception to the norm (over here). Thanks for your open-mindedness and objective viewpoints!

[FormulaOutlaw]

[QUOTE=JDeere]

Nothing wrong thrill seeking until it infringes on other people. Your post makes it clear that you think about your first otherwise you would not have felt it necessary to take a shot at someone. If you need speed to get your thrill then by all means go out and get them but not when you put others at risk but it appears that that is not an issue to you…………..hence we need laws to make you the outlaw you wannabe.

Sorry, I don't see where someone operating a performance boat in a responsible manner is infringing on your rights, no more than you paddling by in a canoe would be infringing on mine.

And a "wannabe"???? In 2003 I helped produce two national boat races, (The Suncoast Offshore Grand Prix and the Sarasota Offshore Showdown, which I was the Chairman for the Tow/Patrol Committee, Co-Chairman for the Driver/Sponsor Party, and the "Course Captain"), five poker runs, two fun runs, which benefited the Suncoast Foundation for the Handicapped, The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, and the Sarasota Chapter of PAL along with others. I volunteered over seven hundred hours of my time for these events which totaled over half a million dollars raised for charities. I sit on two Boards of Directors for two different "offshore groups".

JDeere, please list what you have done for the boating community as of late.

And then we'll see who's the "wannabe".

p.s. I plan on trailering "OUTLAW", my boat, up to Maine next summer. I will certainly find the time to run "Lake Winni". I am very much looking forward to it. I'll be easy to spot. "OUTLAW" is emblazened on the hullsides.

[b8tcaster]

How fast is that sucker?

[FormulaOutlaw]

Originally Posted by b8tcaster

How fast is that sucker?

That's top secret information, but it can't pass a gas dock. LOL