more expert testimony on SB-27

[DEJ]

Here is an actual "article" written by an actual "reporter" that is trained in journalism.


Laconia Daily Sun April 8th on SBONH
President insists Safe Boaters is not a 1 issue group; few own 'performance' craft, he says
By Michael Kitch
Apr 08, 2011 12:00 am
CONCORD — In the ongoing debate over boating speed limits, Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), the group that has opposed restrictions on speed, has been painted by critics as a "go fast," "thunder boat" crowd of hard-drinking helmsmen hell-bent on whipping across the water at breakneck speeds leaving canoeists, kayakers and anglers trembling in their wash.

Not surprisingly, Scott Verdonck, the president of the organization, bridles at this characterization. Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context." He insists that he never drinks when driving anything — "not a boat, a car, a farm tractor or a bicycle."

The fabricated personal attacks, he said, are aimed at discrediting the organization.

In June, 2008, when the first legislation to limit boat speeds was enacted, the opposition was led by the New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association, whose president, Erica Blizzard of Laconia, was at the helm when her boat struck Diamond Island. One of her passengers lost her life, Blizzard and the other were severely injured. With that the association disappeared from view.

"We have nothing to do with the Recreational Boaters Association," Verdonck said.

SBONH, he recounted, began in November 2009, after the Legislature had set the speed limits for two years and before it voted to make them permanent. When the legislation was filed to make the speed limits permanent, Verdonck contends that SBONH took no position for or against them, but objected to making them permanent until the Department of Safety completed a two year study, which he maintains was the intent of the law. He said that SBONH supported a bill to extend the study another year and only turned against speed limits when it failed.

"We came together because we didn't like the way things were being done," Verdonck said. He estimated that SBONH counts around 100 members, most of whom are year round residents of New Hampshire, while others are seasonal residents and regular visitors. He said that "performance boaters," owners of vessels designed and equipped for speed, were a small minority of the membership.

Verdonck claims that SBONH's agenda is not confined to speed limits. "Our mission is 'to promote safe boating through education and effective legislation,''' he said. "We are not a single issue group." He said that SBONH has developed relationship with other organizations and stakeholders with shared interests and has worked closely with lawmakers and state agencies, especially the New Hampshire Department of Safety (DOS).

Apart from the speed limit issue, SBONH has supported legislation to close a loophole in the mandatory boater education law that ensures that no one younger than 12 can operate a motorboat without supervision of a certified adult while enabling 12 to 15-year-olds to become certified to operate vessels of 25 horsepower or less.

Verdonck said that this year the organization requested legislation to enable boaters to tie up to public docks in the event of medical emergencies or inclement weather, which was tabled because lawmakers found it encroached on local control. SBONH also supported a bill to allow boats to be fitted with a device to reduce exhaust noise to levels set by statute. Verdonck said the group plans to request other legislation to improve safety on the water next year. "We intend to pursue safety issues through effective legislation for years to come," he said.

Last year SBONH incurred the wrath of residents of the Barber Pole area of Tuftonboro when it challenged a petition to have the channel designated a "no wake zone." After granting the designation, the DOS reversed its decision when it discovered the petition was invalid. Verdonck insists that SBONH took no position for or against the "no wake zone" but objected to the inadequate notice of the public hearing, which left interested residents unable to attend, and to the flawed petition.

Last week, residents again petitioned DOS for a "no wake zone" at Barber Pole. Verdonck said that SBONH would again remain strictly neutral while acknowledging that "we will inform our membership and individuals may take positions for and against the proposal."

Despite the sharp differences between SBONH and the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs) over speed limits, Verdonck said that there may be more common ground between the two than first appears. "We both recognize that there are issues, including safety issues, on the lake that need to be managed," he said. "Where we disagree is that we don't believe that excessive speed is the primary, let alone the only issue and that speed limits will solve all the problems."

In particular, Verdonck emphasized the importance of concentrating the limited resources of Marine Patrol on closer enforcement of the so-called "safe passage" or "150-foot rule," which requires boats to slow to headway speed (6 mph.) within 150 feet of shore, docks, moorings, rafts. swimmers and other vessels. "That is the most important problem and boating while intoxicated is the most dangerous," he said.
.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by DEJ

Here is an actual "article" written by an actual "reporter" that is trained in journalism.


Laconia Daily Sun April 8th on SBONH
President insists Safe Boaters is not a 1 issue group; few own 'performance' craft, he says
By Michael Kitch
Apr 08, 2011 12:00 am
CONCORD — In the ongoing debate over boating speed limits, Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), the group that has opposed restrictions on speed, has been painted by critics as a "go fast," "thunder boat" crowd of hard-drinking helmsmen hell-bent on whipping across the water at breakneck speeds leaving canoeists, kayakers and anglers trembling in their wash.

Not surprisingly, Scott Verdonck, the president of the organization, bridles at this characterization. Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context." He insists that he never drinks when driving anything — "not a boat, a car, a farm tractor or a bicycle."

The fabricated personal attacks, he said, are aimed at discrediting the organization.

In June, 2008, when the first legislation to limit boat speeds was enacted, the opposition was led by the New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association, whose president, Erica Blizzard of Laconia, was at the helm when her boat struck Diamond Island. One of her passengers lost her life, Blizzard and the other were severely injured. With that the association disappeared from view.

"We have nothing to do with the Recreational Boaters Association," Verdonck said.

SBONH, he recounted, began in November 2009, after the Legislature had set the speed limits for two years and before it voted to make them permanent. When the legislation was filed to make the speed limits permanent, Verdonck contends that SBONH took no position for or against them, but objected to making them permanent until the Department of Safety completed a two year study, which he maintains was the intent of the law. He said that SBONH supported a bill to extend the study another year and only turned against speed limits when it failed.

"We came together because we didn't like the way things were being done," Verdonck said. He estimated that SBONH counts around 100 members, most of whom are year round residents of New Hampshire, while others are seasonal residents and regular visitors. He said that "performance boaters," owners of vessels designed and equipped for speed, were a small minority of the membership.

Verdonck claims that SBONH's agenda is not confined to speed limits. "Our mission is 'to promote safe boating through education and effective legislation,''' he said. "We are not a single issue group." He said that SBONH has developed relationship with other organizations and stakeholders with shared interests and has worked closely with lawmakers and state agencies, especially the New Hampshire Department of Safety (DOS).

Apart from the speed limit issue, SBONH has supported legislation to close a loophole in the mandatory boater education law that ensures that no one younger than 12 can operate a motorboat without supervision of a certified adult while enabling 12 to 15-year-olds to become certified to operate vessels of 25 horsepower or less.

Verdonck said that this year the organization requested legislation to enable boaters to tie up to public docks in the event of medical emergencies or inclement weather, which was tabled because lawmakers found it encroached on local control. SBONH also supported a bill to allow boats to be fitted with a device to reduce exhaust noise to levels set by statute. Verdonck said the group plans to request other legislation to improve safety on the water next year. "We intend to pursue safety issues through effective legislation for years to come," he said.

Last year SBONH incurred the wrath of residents of the Barber Pole area of Tuftonboro when it challenged a petition to have the channel designated a "no wake zone." After granting the designation, the DOS reversed its decision when it discovered the petition was invalid. Verdonck insists that SBONH took no position for or against the "no wake zone" but objected to the inadequate notice of the public hearing, which left interested residents unable to attend, and to the flawed petition.

Last week, residents again petitioned DOS for a "no wake zone" at Barber Pole. Verdonck said that SBONH would again remain strictly neutral while acknowledging that "we will inform our membership and individuals may take positions for and against the proposal."

Despite the sharp differences between SBONH and the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs) over speed limits, Verdonck said that there may be more common ground between the two than first appears. "We both recognize that there are issues, including safety issues, on the lake that need to be managed," he said. "Where we disagree is that we don't believe that excessive speed is the primary, let alone the only issue and that speed limits will solve all the problems."

In particular, Verdonck emphasized the importance of concentrating the limited resources of Marine Patrol on closer enforcement of the so-called "safe passage" or "150-foot rule," which requires boats to slow to headway speed (6 mph.) within 150 feet of shore, docks, moorings, rafts. swimmers and other vessels. "That is the most important problem and boating while intoxicated is the most dangerous," he said.
.

This is just more spin from the SBONH to take the attention off of the real problem on the lake. Thanks for nothing!

I like it where he says: Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context."

He sure is a big JOKESTER isn't he. Has anyone ever read some of that trash???

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Rusty

This is just more spin from the SBONH to take the attention off of the real problem on the lake. Thanks for nothing!

I like it where he says: Alluding to widely circulated e-mails, in which he tells of drinking bouts, he claims that "they are jokes and quotes taken completely out of context."

He sure is a big JOKESTER isn't he. Has anyone ever read some of that trash???

Rusty, please submit every email, every joke, and every derogatory comment you've ever told in your life (written or spoken). When you can prove to me you're clean as a whistle then come back and make these statements..... I'm waiting

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

Rusty, please submit every email, every joke, and every derogatory comment you've ever told in your life (written or spoken). When you can prove to me you're clean as a whistle then come back and make these statements..... I'm waiting

Sorry psycho but I don't have any of that stuff scattered all over the World Wide Web to show you. I have too much respect for myself and my family to do that.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

..... I'm waiting

I'm waiting to see if anybody can name the three fatal accident on Winni in the last 10 years. You guys keep claiming they don't apply to an argument for speed limits. Now I don't think you even know what they are!

If you can't name them, please stop saying they don't apply.

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm waiting to see if anybody can name the three fatal accident on Winni in the last 10 years. You guys keep claiming they don't apply to an argument for speed limits. Now I don't think you even know what they are!

If you can't name them, please stop saying they don't apply.

I do and we've already hashed through this. Edit: How do you want to count the drunk falling overboard on the Mount and what law do you want to pass to stop it?

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm waiting to see if anybody can name the three fatal accident on Winni in the last 10 years. ...

I have a little problem when you say three, obviously Blizzard and Littlefield were convicted of causing a fatal accident, so we have all kinds of data.

But the two fishermen in 2009, the guy who fell off the Mount, the guy who just fell off his hovercraft, the two people who drowned from their boats in 2006, the diver in 2004, which one is number three?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by jrc

I have a little problem when you say three, obviously Blizzard and Littlefield were convicted of causing a fatal accident, so we have all kinds of data.

But the two fishermen in 2009, the guy who fell off the Mount, the guy who just fell off his hovercraft, the two people who drowned from their boats in 2006, the diver in 2004, which one is number three?

WOW! You really don't know!

Sorry, the third accident is none of the above.

[jarhead0341]

wow....... back to the mid 70' s alcohol related accident again .... you know the one that we have no official data on how fast the boat was travelling

[Rusty]

Altogether of the 80 people who signed the roll at the House Transportation Committee hearing yesterday, 73 marked themselves opposed to SB-27.

Where has all the support for the Bill gone???? I think the hand writing is on the wall about this Bill!


Below is the article that is in today's LDS:

CONCORD — After nearly six years what can be said for or against speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee has been said and yesterday was said again before the House Transportation Committee during a two-and-a-half hour hearing on Senate Bill 27, which would raise the limit on The Broads to 55 mile per hour.

No stranger to the issue, Rep. Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry), who chairs the committee, opened the hearing by announcing that apart from the bill's sponsors, the 50 people seeking to speak would be limited to two minutes. "Keep it civil," he reminded the overflow crowd, "or I will shut you off." Likewise, directing members of the committee to keep their questions relevant and short, he warned "otherwise I'll shut the committee off. Let's hope we can get through this nicely and quickly," he said.

In 2009 the Legislature set limits of 45 mph. in daylight and 25 mph. after dark for two years but last year, after raising the nighttime limit to 30 mph., made them permanent. This year Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), formed in opposition to the speed limits, sought to replace them with a standard of "reasonable and prudent," but, at the urging of lawmakers agreed to a bill that would maintain the limits while exempting The Broads, which would be designated a 55 mph. zone.

Last month SB-27 carried the Senate by the narrowest of margins —13 to 11. Senators Jeanie Forrester (R-Meredith) and Jeb Bradley (R) Wolfeboro voted against changing the current law while Jim Forsythe (R-Strafford), the third senator representing the Lakes Region, voted for the bill.

"Good things always happen in Holy Week," Senator Lou D'Allesandro (D-Manchester), who introduced SB-27, told the committee. He said that the bill kept the speed limits in place except for "a specified area — The Broads. That is the only change." When Representative Lisa Sontsas (R-Nashua) alluded to highway driving and whether a posted limit of 55 mph. amounted to a practical limit of 65 mph., D'Allesandro simply read from the bill.

Speaking against the bill, Forrester recalled that she, together with her parents and brother, was the victim of a boating accident on Lake Huron caused by excessive speed that left her mother and brother with lasting injuries. Moreover, she said that e-mails and letters from individuals and businesses, especially those in the hospitality industry around the lake, were running three-to-one in opposition to any change to the speed limits.

Forrester was echoed by representatives from the Lakes Region, including Alida Millham (R-Gilford), Harry Accornero (R-Laconia) , Elaine Swinford (R-Barnstead), Bob Luther (R-Laconia) and Bill Tobin (R-Sanbornton) also spoke against increasing the speed limit on The Broads.

Jeff Thurston of Thurston's Marina at The Weirs emphasized that "uniformity is important," urging the committee not to "create a zone of frenzied activity," which he cautioned would further stretch the scarce resources of Marine Patrol. He said that exempting The Broads from the 45 mph. speed limit would be "impractical and not enhance safety."

Dick Bouley, a lobbyist representing the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABS), the organization that from the beginning has led the effort to curb speed on the lake, told the committee that he was "disturbed" that the bill was originally assigned to the Resources, Recreation and Development Committee, which includes three members from the Lakes Region, was referred to the Transportation Committee, where the region is unrepresented. He urged the committee members to pay special attention to lawmakers and residents of the Lakes Region.

Altogether of the 80 people who signed the roll at the hearing, 73 marked themselves opposed to SB-27.

The bill drew its strongest support from SBONH, who have consistently challenged the need for speed limits, frequently citing David Barrett, the director of Marine Patrol, who has said more than once that speed is not a problem on the lake. Likewise, the organization has consistently argued that there is no statistical evidence to support the claims of WinnFABS that excessive speeds have increased the risks of boating on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Scott Verdonck, president of SBONH, insisted that SB-27 represents a compromise by maintaining speed limits on the most heavily travelled parts of the lake while raising the daytime limit just 10 mph. on The Broads where there are no islands and little traffic.

Dick Smith, conservation director of the New Hampshire Bass Federation, said his group saw no need for speed limits, but "reluctantly supported SB-27." He explained that bass fisherman pilot fast boats, designed to get them from one fishing spot to another in the least time to allow the maximum time for fishing. Questioning the wisdom of speed limits, he said that at some times 45 mph. is too fast and at others it is too slow.

Ultimately, said Smith the debate has dragged on for far too too long. "Let's put this to bed," he told the committee. "Let's stop it and let's go fishing."
.

[jrc]

Bear Islander, in a few weeks I have a milestone birthday, so I'm old and forgetful, let me off the hook and tell me what fatal boating accident in the last decade you are talking about. My point was that there were a lot more than three, and speed had nothing to do with the majority of them.

Rusty, sorry I made the mistake of thinking that you were a normal person that just got a little overzealous and neglected the unwritten rules that you need to back up what you say and the rules that say, I wouldn't want my name smeared with rumors and innuendo, so I won't smear others.

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

WOW! You really don't know!

Sorry, the third accident is none of the above.

So explain to me why 45 MPH is justified over any other speed as a numerical limit?

We've been over this before. Do you REALLY believe a speed limit would have made even the slightest difference in these case? In the Blizzard case even if MP was correct in their numbers we're talking a different of maybe 2-5 MPH. If you want to split hairs then fine but it won't help your argument.

With most boats doing well under the speed limit (even before the SL was slammed through) and a limited number of MP officers (they can't be everywhere) I personally think the SL is a waste of time as an enforcement tool. A lot of effort with little results.

You have wanted to and support restricting all sorts of activities of boaters on Winni. Rafting, overnight anchoring, speed, horsepower, etc. I'm not being a wise arse but why did you buy a lake front property? It's not like people are beaching there boats on your property and lighting a bon-fire for a party.

I just don't understand why people get so wound up about boating activities on a lake. I hope you weren't suprised after moving onto BI that boats would be going by. When I read your posts you make it seem as if every boater out there to cause trouble and infringing on your minute little world.

Is it really that big a deal that someone with a nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro to meet some friends or over to Meredith to walk around or to the Weirs to waste a few quarters playing Galaga in the arcade? Heaven forbid they head over to a nice sandbar and drop anchor and get 149.9999 feet from shore as they might just be having too much of a good time! 150 ft and they're OK.

When I read editorials like Bill's it is clear to me that he's gotten to a win-lose stance rather than sticking to what's important.

Regardless of what we type here on the forum I suspect that most legislators already have their minds made up on how they'll vote. I hope the 55 MPH limit passes (still too low) because even my middle of the road Four Winns can do 45 MPH on calm days in comfort and nobody feels like it's being driven by Mario Andretti. When everyday boats like mine start getting restricted like this you should not be suprised at the back-lash. Your side has benefitted the most by misinformation as if I took every legislator out on a boat at 45 MPH they would quickly realize it's not that fast, not by a long shot.

Instead of going for the red herring arguments why don't you and the WinnFlabs consortium start putting perspective into the discussion?

Red Herring Example1: Has the lake been overrun by fast boats for the last 40 years as Bill asserts? I think not.

Red Herring Example2: How many campers have been run over by fast boats? Zero! But yet and others have thrown that into the mix for the soundbite. Let us not forget most camps operate during the week when the lake is practically a ghost town.

You can bet if the 45 MPH sticks that this issue isn't going away. WinnFlabs is not working towards safety and their arguments are deceptive to anyone who supports there SL efforts.

SBONH has promoted safety inspections. Ask MP and they will tell you boats are out there without adequate equipment.

SBONH worked to help reduce the noise issue which I think is the elephant in the room for many of the SL supported but they won't admit it. So now maybe you can refer to the boats as GFBQ, eh? Personally, I find the guy who comes into the sandbar as Johnny come lately with his mega bass speakers for the whole area to hear as more of a PITA nuisance than a boat going by.

SBONH supports the 150 ft rule and supports increased BUI enforcement.

Those are things that really impact the quality and safety of the lake. We should all be happy for that. A speed limit will do nothing for the lake IMO.

I for one will be the wacky guy who waves to all my fellow boaters (even you and Rusty). I would like to see more comraderie out on the lake.

In fact, I am hoping we can find a nice spot and have a nice big Winni.com raft-up sometime later this year. I'll even tip my homemade lemonade an/or sun tea to ya'!

[Rusty]

LP,

That was a very well written post. Thank you!

I will also be a wacky guy who waves to all my fellow boaters (including you LP).

[fatlazyless]

Every lake and river in Massachusetts has a 45-mph speed limit for motorboats. It's a state wide law! That alone makes it a good reason for New Hampshire to do the same thing!

The State of Montana used to have no speed limit on their interstate highways, but not anymore. They now have a posted speed limit just like all the other states. The problem with no speed limits in Montana was that people would drive their cars there just to open them up, driving as fast as they could go, just for the experience or the fun of it, or some non-reason called "the need for speed."

Going 45-mph in a boat is hardly a slow speed. 45-mph is very fast for most all boats and if this 55-mph speed limit gets passed through the House for some whacko-fruitloop manipulation coming from "leadership" reason then you can bet your go-fast that Governor Lynch will be right there with a fast VETO on it! You can expect to see Gov Lynch's VETO coming right at you at about 107-mph.......zoom.....roooarrrr.....budda, budda, bing!

Way-to-go.......Gov Lynch.......one fast veto (anticipated in advance)!

At yesterday's State House hearing chaired by Rep Sherman Packard, 73 out of the 80 people who signed the hearing roll indicated they were opposed to SB-27 and the proposed increase from 45 to 55-mph. (Today's LaDaSun SB-27 article)
..........

"Boating activist has need for speed;" today's April 20 www.cmonitor.com front page article.....Monitor articles are almost always much lengthier than the U.L. and have follow up email comments, too.

[Chimi]

Another clear, concise letter to the editor of today's Laconia Daily Sun. Someone else who sees through Mr. Berthold's & WinnFABS continuous avoidance of the real issues. Thank you Mr. Stewart (Now please go register to vote because Mr. Berthold and WinnFABS will be checking on you for sure).

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/story/terry-stewart-4-19

It's reasonable to allow for higher speeds on largest part of lake
Apr 20, 2011 12:00 am
To the editor, It’s very unfortunate that the fuddy duddies are still harping about the boating speed limit and wasting the valuable time of our state’s leadership. Given the more pressing problems we are facing I’d really prefer my representatives to keep their eye on th...
To the editor,

It’s very unfortunate that the fuddy duddies are still harping about the boating speed limit and wasting the valuable time of our state’s leadership. Given the more pressing problems we are facing I’d really prefer my representatives to keep their eye on the budget problems. I believe representative Forsythe used common sense in concluding that if we have faster speed limits on I-93 then we do on Rt.106, then it’s reasonable to have a faster speed limit in the Broads of Lake Winnipesaukee.

Of course, common sense doesn’t seem to matter to the WinnFABS crowd. WinnFABS local mouth piece, Mr. Bertholdt, has a lot of nerve accusing anyone of making misleading statements after some of the whoppers he’s been spouting. Most, if not all of his data, comes from waterways other than New Hampshire. Much of it is Coast Guard data encompassing every other body of water in the U.S., including our oceans. The problem for the WinnFABS folks is that the facts simply don’t support their rhetoric. The fact is that 90-percent of our lake’s boating fatalities occurred on boats that weren’t even moving and most of the others were alcohol related. I do agree with his statements on more rigid requirements on boater education, however that has little to do with speed limits.

Apparently Mr. Bertholdt hasn’t listened to one of his own lengthy tomes lately. He often refers to his opposition as “spoiled brats” and the “go fast make noise crowd”. You see it’s not about safety; it’s really about “those people”. Seriously, who would suggest canoeing in the middle of the Broads as a “safe” activity? Even with zero boats on the lake that would be dangerous on most days. As far as noise is concerned; thanks to WinnFABS efforts, we all get to listen to those loud boats go by slowly and for a much longer period of time. Life was clearly better when the noise simply went by quickly.

If we must have a speed limit, which we really don’t, then there isn’t any reason why it can’t be reasonable in the sense that it allows for higher speeds in the largest part of the lake that provides plenty of reaction time. The proposed 55 MPH daytime limit isn’t outrageous. Many of the “right kind” of people that Mr. Berthold would approve of own leisure craft and wave runners that are safely driven at that speed. Safety as whole won’t be effected by the speed limit change because it was never a factor to begin with. Can’t we all just get along and live with this change and move on with our lives?

Terry Stewart

Gilford

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

"Boating activist has need for speed;" today's April 20 www.cmonitor.com front page article.....Monitor articles are almost always much lengthier than the U.L. and have follow up email comments, too.

That's awesome! My boat is on the front page. Four Winns should give me some royalty money for getting their brand out there.

[Dhuberty24]

[QUOTE=fatlazyless;155268]Every lake and river in Massachusetts has a 45-mph speed limit for motorboats. It's a state wide law! That alone makes it a good reason for New Hampshire to do the same thing!

That is the dumbest reason for a speedlimit I have ever heard. If Massachusetts jumps of a bridge are you going to?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Every lake and river in Massachusetts has a 45-mph speed limit for motorboats. It's a state wide law! That alone makes it a good reason for New Hampshire NOT to do the same thing!

fixed it for you

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

Red Herring Example2: How many campers have been run over by fast boats? Zero! But yet and others have thrown that into the mix for the soundbite. Let us not forget most camps operate during the week when the lake is practically a ghost town.

You are all for camaraderie, getting all sides together, and enjoying the lake with lemonade. Yet you still insist on using and insulting misnomer when referring to WinnFABS.

I disagree with much of your post, but one paragraph is so nuts I just have to call you on it.

Do you really think most camps on the lake are closed on weekends? The truth is they just look closed because they will not send out their sailboats, kayaks and canoes onto a weekend cowboy filled lake.

It is unfortunate that when people take their "nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro" they have no idea how many thousands of children are being kept off the lake so you can have a nice ride.

THAT is the truth of the situation. Thousands inconvenienced so that dozens can go fast. But you are going by so fast, you can't see, or even imagine what you are doing.

[Chimi]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You are all for camaraderie, getting all sides together, and enjoying the lake with lemonade. Yet you still insist on using and insulting misnomer when referring to WinnFABS.

I disagree with much of your post, but one paragraph is so nuts I just have to call you on it.

Do you really think most camps on the lake are closed on weekends? The truth is they just look closed because they will not send out their sailboats, kayaks and canoes onto a weekend cowboy filled lake.

It is unfortunate that when people take their "nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro" they have no idea how many thousands of children are being kept off the lake so you can have a nice ride.

THAT is the truth of the situation. Thousands inconvenienced so that dozens can go fast. But you are going by so fast, you can't see, or even imagine what you are doing.

Let's not forget now about the unlicensed rental boaters. They, of course, never go near campers, kayaks and canoes and never cause a safety hazard. Oh yeah, and according to Mr. Berthold, they only want to rent for an hour or so and don't want to keep their families waiting while they take an actual boater education class. How many marinas on this lake offer a 1-hour boat rental? Answer: Probably none. I believe you'll find that it's either a 1/2 day or full day minimum rental, so again, Mr. Berthold's lies and mistruths come right to the head of the class.

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You are all for camaraderie, getting all sides together, and enjoying the lake with lemonade. Yet you still insist on using and insulting misnomer when referring to WinnFABS.

I disagree with much of your post, but one paragraph is so nuts I just have to call you on it.

Do you really think most camps on the lake are closed on weekends? The truth is they just look closed because they will not send out their sailboats, kayaks and canoes onto a weekend cowboy filled lake.

It is unfortunate that when people take their "nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro" they have no idea how many thousands of children are being kept off the lake so you can have a nice ride.

THAT is the truth of the situation. Thousands inconvenienced so that dozens can go fast. But you are going by so fast, you can't see, or even imagine what you are doing.

Thousands of children? Are you guys compulsive exaggerators?

See you out on the lake

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

Thousands of children? Are you guys compulsive exaggerators?

See you out on the lake

Thank you for once again displaying how out of touch you people are.

Bear Island alone has two camps with 4 two week (including Saturdays and Sundays) sessions of 300 campers. That is 1,200 campers just on one island.


I'm still waiting to hear about the third fatal accident in the last ten years.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm still waiting to hear about the third fatal accident in the last ten years.

Could it possibly be the under aged ladd that took out his parents waverunner without their permission and crashed it?

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Thank you for once again displaying how out of touch you people are.

Bear Island alone has two camps with 4 two week (including Saturdays and Sundays) sessions of 300 campers. That is 1,200 campers just on one island.


I'm still waiting to hear about the third fatal accident in the last ten years.

No thank you for showing how much you distort facts. You said, "thousands of children are being kept off the lake."

The camps have sent kids out on the water before the speed limit. And how many were run over? And let's untwist the distortion. There are never thousands of kids standing on the beach with kayak in hand sighing because boats are keeping them off the water. It's simply not true and you know it.

In fact, any camp that put all 300 kids out in boats on the water I would question the ability to properly supervise that many kids.

RED HERRING

[Woodsy]

BI...

So essentially your saying that during an 8 week summer session, there are 300 children at any given time on Bear Island? and of these kids how many are actually old enough to venture onto the water unsupervised? Not exactly thousands....

Lets talk some facts.... the lake is very very quiet during the week. The camps can effectively and safely run thier watersport programs during the week. The ONLY time those children may be inconvenienced is on saturdays... thats the day EVERYONE boats. Saturdays are the busiest days on the lake by far. A few sundays qualify on the holiday weekends. So why not schedule the water fun then? Whats so hard about that?

The Camp/Childrens freedoms do not trump anyone elses freedoms.... There has never been ANY accident involving a child at camp and a hi speed (< current limits) boat EVER! Not 1 accident!!! I think there is plenty of room on this lake to share with everyone!

Woodsy

[lawn psycho]

Woodsy, it's some of those same kids who are out on the water doing 65+ on waverunners and skiing behind Nautiques's but of course that doesn't matter to BI either.

[Chimi]

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...read.php?t=720

Interesting how APS (then Madrashas) thought the lake problems were caused by boat waves back in 2004. They all got tired of beating that dead horse so they had to start on something else - speed limits.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

Woodsy, it's some of those same kids who are out on the water doing 65+ on waverunners and skiing behind Nautiques's but of course that doesn't matter to BI either.

Huh??? What are you talking about?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

BI...

So essentially your saying that during an 8 week summer session, there are 300 children at any given time on Bear Island? and of these kids how many are actually old enough to venture onto the water unsupervised? Not exactly thousands....

Lets talk some facts.... the lake is very very quiet during the week. The camps can effectively and safely run thier watersport programs during the week. The ONLY time those children may be inconvenienced is on saturdays... thats the day EVERYONE boats. Saturdays are the busiest days on the lake by far. A few sundays qualify on the holiday weekends. So why not schedule the water fun then? Whats so hard about that?

The Camp/Childrens freedoms do not trump anyone elses freedoms.... There has never been ANY accident involving a child at camp and a hi speed (< current limits) boat EVER! Not 1 accident!!! I think there is plenty of room on this lake to share with everyone!

Woodsy

Woodsy

If unsupervised means no counselors actually in the boat, then nearly 100% of campers go out on the lake "unsupervised" at some point. A sailboat or war canoe might have two older (about 14 year old), campers and two younger (about 7 year old) campers.

Everyday is pretty much the same at camp. Usually two activity periods in the morning, two in the afternoon and perhaps one in the evening. Activities are rotated so if 15 campers can do sailing in one period then 75 can be in sailboats in a day. The same is true for kayaks, canoes, and water skiing. Therefore you could theoretically have 75 x 4 = 300 campers on the lake in one day. Each camp on Bear has only 150 campers each so on a really good day you could average 2 boat experiences, per camper, per day.

In reality there is a good chance you will lose 2 days or more of boating a week because of rain, high winds or it being session swap day. Add 2 days for the weekend cowboys and you might only be able to put boats out on the lake 3 out of 7 days in a week.

Can camps double up on off water activities on weekends? Yes, they do it all the time. Is that fair and reasonable? No, it's not! Are most boaters oblivious to the damage they are doing to the programming in children's camps? Yes, they are!

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Woodsy

If unsupervised means no counselors actually in the boat, then nearly 100% of campers go out on the lake "unsupervised" at some point. A sailboat or war canoe might have two older (about 14 year old), campers and two younger (about 7 year old) campers.

Everyday is pretty much the same at camp. Usually two activity periods in the morning, two in the afternoon and perhaps one in the evening. Activities are rotated so if 15 campers can do sailing in one period then 75 can be in sailboats in a day. The same is true for kayaks, canoes, and water skiing. Therefore you could theoretically have 75 x 4 = 300 campers on the lake in one day. Each camp on Bear has only 150 campers each so on a really good day you could average 2 boat experiences, per camper, per day.

In reality there is a good chance you will lose 2 days or more of boating a week because of rain, high winds or it being session swap day. Add 2 days for the weekend cowboys and you might only be able to put boats out on the lake 3 out of 7 days in a week.

Can camps double up on off water activities on weekends? Yes, they do it all the time. Is that fair and reasonable? No, it's not! Are most boaters oblivious to the damage they are doing to the programming in children's camps? Yes, they are!

And how many days out of the summer do I actually get to boat after paying THOUSANDS of dollars in slip, hotels, maintenance, and restaurants?

Us nasty cowboys that have a boat that can do 50 MPH are just ruining it for everybody. Yeah right.

Get a grip BI

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Can camps double up on off water activities on weekends? Yes, they do it all the time. Is that fair and reasonable? No, it's not! Are most boaters oblivious to the damage they are doing to the programming in children's camps? Yes, they are!

I don't undertstand how raising the speed limit to 55 on the Broads affects kids going to camp on Bear Island. With the 45 MPH daytime speed limit, there's obviously nothing to limit to on-water activities right now. If the speed limit gets raised in the Broads, nothing changes for Bear Island camps, it's still 45 MPH near the camps.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Dave R

I don't undertstand how raising the speed limit to 55 on the Broads affects kids going to camp on Bear Island. With the 45 MPH daytime speed limit, there's obviously nothing to limit to on-water activities right now. If the speed limit gets raised in the Broads, nothing changes for Bear Island camps, it's still 45 MPH near the camps.

You are correct. I am not opposed to 55 mph on the broads. It seems to be a very reasonable compromise.

The central argument is speed limits vs no limits.

Are you saying that if 55 in the broads passes you will then be perfectly happy with speed limits?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Are you saying that if 55 in the broads passes you will then be perfectly happy with speed limits?

I think 55 is a little slow for an area that's 15 square miles open water, but it's better than 45 and a step in the right direction. I was perfectly happy without daytime limits, but I think 45 around areas like Bear Island is reasonable and prudent.

[fatlazyless]

Yesterday's April 20 Laconia Citizen, which is now only available to read when you buy it for 50-cents at a news stand and not on the internet anymore, had a headline article on the SB-27 hearing at the statehouse. The Concord Monitor, Laconia Daily Sun, and the Laconia Citizen all had news stories on it. The Union Leader, which is the biggest newspaper in the state, did not cover it.

The article in the Citizen suggests that the tide of legislative opinion in the 400-seat House of Representatives could be turning, and that it well could be that SB-27 will be voted NO by a majority of the state reps.

Of the 80 different people who attended the hearing as visitors to the statehouse, which included "camp directors, the Loon Preservation Society, business owners, the N.H. Lakes Association, and regular voters": 73 signed the roll as being against SB-27, which raises the speed limit in the broads from 45-mph up to 55-mph, and only 7 were in favor. That's a ratio of ten to one!

Could be that Gov Lynch and his veto stamp may not be needed? Time will tell?

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

The article in the Citizen suggests that the tide of legislative opinion in the 400-seat House of Representatives could be turning, and that it well could be that SB-27 will be voted NO by a majority of the state reps.

You are right "fatlazyless", the tide is changing in a big way.

The Republican State Representative D. J. Bettencourt, the House majority leader, has just put this thing to bed. He is against SB-27.


This is what the Citizen article said:

Boat speed limit supporters buoyed by hearing
Posted: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:00 am

Boat speed limit supporters buoyed by hearing By JOHN KOZIOL [email protected] citizen.com | 0 comments

CONCORD — Based on his and others' testimony, including a number of Lakes Region lawmakers, Warren Hutchins is optimistic that a bill to raise the daytime speed limit in The Broads on Lake Winnipesaukee will not succeed.

Senate Bill 27, which squeaked out of the Senate on a 13-11 vote, was the subject of four hours of hearings Tuesday before the House of Representative's Transportation Committee which will vote on the item sometime next month.

In addition to what he said appeared to be the committee's receptivity to the pro-speed limits argument, Hutchins, who is a Laconia resident and a member of WinnFABS — the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety — also has an e-mail pledge from state Rep. D.J. Bettencourt, the House Republican leader, to oppose SB27.

SB27 represents a compromise presented by the Safe Boaters of New Hampshire, which has faced off against WinnFABS since 2006, that would have eliminated numeric speed limits on the Big Lake entirely, instead letting Marine Patrol officers determine whether a boat was traveling too fast for current conditions.

Having prevailed in getting the Legislature in 2009 to adopt a 45-mile-per-hour daytime limit and 25 mph nighttime limit on Lake Winnipesaukee, WinnFABS and its supporters were upset when the N.H. General Court last year raised the nighttime limit to 30 mph. When SB27 was introduced earlier this year, WinnFABS lined up against it and later against the compromise proposed by SBONH that would raise the daytime limit to 50 mph, but only in The Broads.

Last week, both WinnFABS and SBONH released studies that they said bolstered their respective positions. On Tuesday, Hutchins said he reiterated some of the points in his group's research which he noted found overwhelming support for speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee.

By his math, Hutchins thinks speed limit supporters outnumbered opponents by a factor of 10:1 on Tuesday, based on the number of people who noted their preference in writing to the committee; while in direct testimony, "and I try not to be prejudiced, but I believe it was close to 85 percent of speakers who wanted to leave the 45-25 as it is."

Among the speakers on behalf of the speed limits were Jeff Thurston of Thurston Marine in Laconia, as well as state representatives Alida Millham, R-Gilford, chair of the Belknap County Delegation, as well as Peter Bolster, R-Alton; and Harry Accornero and Bob Luther, both of whom are Republicans from Laconia.

Hutchins presented letters from both the Laconia City Council and the executive board of the Lakes Region Planning Commission supporting current speed limits.

A member of the Laconia Planning Board, Hutchins also pointed out that, of the 1,500 approved residential units in Laconia, 85 percent are in The Weirs "and the reason for that is the lake."

"We need buyers who want to come buy these properties," said Hutchins, and the buyers will come, he continued, if they know they will have safe access to the lake.

Hutchins said he called members' attention to the fact that the transportation committee has no one from the Lakes Region serving on it and said the committee needs to question the credibility of those who come before it to speak on behalf of SB27.

"I feel very confident" that SB27 will not get out of the committee to the full House, said Hutchins. "I felt that the committee members were paying attention and could discern credible evidence."

He added that he was further encouraged by a reply he received to an e-mail he sent to Bettencourt.

In his April 10 answer, a copy of which Hutchins provided to The Citizen, Bettencourt concedes that, while he previously opposed speed limits, that no is longer the case.

"Since this issue directly affects an area outside of my district, I am going to be deferential to those voices who experience and live with this issue everyday. Therefore, it is my intention to oppose Senate Bill 27."
Bettencourt said feedback "indicates the limits have been a success and that the lake has not lost its fun or enjoyment. It is also clear that the speed limits have not stopped ANYONE from boating. In fact, they have instilled and reinforced a sense of proper behavior on our state's most important and well-known waterway."

[Pineedles]

And somehow the lake fills with thousands of children when boats pass by at 45 MPH?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You are all for camaraderie, getting all sides together, and enjoying the lake with lemonade. Yet you still insist on using and insulting misnomer when referring to WinnFABS.

I disagree with much of your post, but one paragraph is so nuts I just have to call you on it.

Do you really think most camps on the lake are closed on weekends? The truth is they just look closed because they will not send out their sailboats, kayaks and canoes onto a weekend cowboy filled lake.

It is unfortunate that when people take their "nice Cobalt can easily cruise along at 55 MPH going from Center Harbor to Wolfboro" they have no idea how many thousands of children are being kept off the lake so you can have a nice ride.

THAT is the truth of the situation. Thousands inconvenienced so that dozens can go fast. But you are going by so fast, you can't see, or even imagine what you are doing.

I've stayed out of this battle for a while, it is time to put my 2 cents in.

Is 55mph in the Broads vs 45mph really that different? That does not allow for speeders to be blasting by Lawrence or Nokomis endangering children. Some of the articles I have read make the proposed change sound like the 10mph increase spells the end of people's safety on the lake which simply isn't true. Chances are you probably won't even notice a difference. I can't imagine every fast boat in the northeast is going to converge on the 9.5 mile long "speed zone" to get a few extra mph in. If the limit was 20-30mph faster maybe...

I don't have a dog in this fight. My jet ski is quite fast but my fastest boat will only do 55mph and I doubt that MP is going to give me a second glance if I am doing 50-55mph in a pontoon vs 45mph. I could truly care less one way or the other if it passes or not as I am not affected. Does that mean I will intentionally push the limit? No.

Hats off to Winnfabs for their aggressive fight on this, but the truth behind this is that they are exaggerating the truth and have been for some time.

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

The truth is they just look closed because they will not send out their sailboats, kayaks and canoes onto a weekend cowboy filled lake.

When you say "cowboy filled lake" do you mean that it is very busy and congested on weekends with all sorts of watercraft on the lake? Thought so!

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Rusty

...

He sure is a big JOKESTER isn't he. Has anyone ever read some of that trash???

No I haven't, please show me this so I can make an informed decision. If you can't show this and back up your arguements, you really shouldn't expect me to take you seriously. Plus you should retract your innuendo.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by jrc

No I haven't, please show me this so I can make an informed decision. If you can't show this and back up your arguements, you really shouldn't expect me to take you seriously. Plus you should retract your innuendo.

Not retraction necessary my friend. I never accused anyone of BWI and if you can show me where I have then I'll retract it.

I don't think the audience on this forum wants to see those e-mails and forum comments again that were made by the president of the SBONH.
Please don't push me to post these because I don't really like reading them either.

Thank you