Kayak Cut in Half in Meredith

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Paugus Bay Resident

I didn't see anyone mention "flying along"

PBR, You see this is the "pro" speed limits way of trying to make this incident fit into their cry for help from all the boats "flying along".

As you pointed out, there was never any mention of speed in this incident.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

PBR, You see this is the "pro" speed limits way of trying to make this incident fit into their cry for help from all the boats "flying along".

As you pointed out, there was never any mention of speed in this incident.

WeirsBeachBoater and Paugus Bay Resident are sniping. Looking through the posts of people they don't like in hopes of finding something they can make into an attack.

The boat had gone from Meredith Bay to Bear Island and was headed back. If it was moving it had a speed, we just don't know what that speed was.

We do know they couldn't see an obstacle in their path before it was to late. Therefore they were going TO fast.

A Meredith resident is in prison right now. He was convicted of operator inattention because he hit another boat at night.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Islander

We do know they couldn't see an obstacle in their path before it was to late. Therefore they were going TO fast.

A Meredith resident is in prison right now. He was convicted of operator inattention because he hit another boat at night.

Who is picking and choosing their words to make this a speed issue? Also, why are you dragging the past into this? We are all aware of the past incident. You only pull it up to cause issues. I am the only one who will step up and call the pro-speed limit side all out as Alarmists, and on the fact that they all try and make every incident a "speed issue". Give it up. Speed isn't the issue, Education, Enforcement of current boating laws will make our lake a better place. Unfortunately we can't teach common sense or courtesy, if we could, none of us would have any gripes to write about on here.

[Island Lover]

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

Who is picking and choosing their words to make this a speed issue? Also, why are you dragging the past into this? We are all aware of the past incident. You only pull it up to cause issues. I am the only one who will step up and call the pro-speed limit side all out as Alarmists, and on the fact that they all try and make every incident a "speed issue". Give it up. Speed isn't the issue, Education, Enforcement of current boating laws will make our lake a better place. Unfortunately we can't teach common sense or courtesy, if we could, none of us would have any gripes to write about on here.

New Hampshire must have a lot of alarmists because 78% of registered voters support a speed limit. And 74% think it will make our lakes more enjoyable. Both from an independent poll.

Education and enforcement are wonderful, but they are not making and can not make the changes we need. The speed limit will pass easily this time. Then you will one day notice that the most offensive boats and people have gone to faster waters. And most of us will say GOOD BYE!

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

New Hampshire must have a lot of alarmists because 78% of registered voters support a speed limit. And 74% think it will make our lakes more enjoyable. Both from an independent poll.

Education and enforcement are wonderful, but they are not making and can not make the changes we need. The speed limit will pass easily this time. Then you will one day notice that the most offensive boats and people have gone to faster waters. And most of us will say GOOD BYE!

because your poll of non boaters does not mean a thing to me. Ask people the right question, and anybody can get the desired answer. For example: When people were posed the question, In this day and age with all the worry about the enviroment and global warming, Don't you think we should put a ban on DiHydrogen Monoxide... Overwhelming amounts of people said YES.. Now to those who don't know what it is H2o is another way of stating it. Now if you can convince a majority of those polled that water is bad for them. Imagine how easy it is to get 78% of those polled (by the way most have no boating experience, but they don't mention that) to agree that speed limits are a must have on the lakes.

BTW, isn't this thread hijacked enough. I will make this my last post, unless we move this discussion to appropriate thread in the speed limit forum.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by Island Lover

New Hampshire must have a lot of alarmists because 78% of registered voters support a speed limit. And 74% think it will make our lakes more enjoyable. Both from an independent poll.

This should be taken to the speed limit forum as it brings up the old argument of paid lobbyists "educating" the non-boating population before the survey. It will be sad daywhen the bass boaters are encouraged to stay under 45 just to keep the safe yet "scary" big boats off the big lake.

[michael c]

34 per cent of ALL auto accidents are caused by drunk drivers.

therefore we must also know that 66 per cent of all auto accidents are caused by sober people.... Using your logic , If we all drove around drunk, there would be far fewer auto accidents ....
Anyone can make the numbers fit their situation /viewpoint.

If we stay with the facts and not go off course and begin debating what a boaters responsibilites under THESE conditions or "those conditions" ,,,not
"what if's " and "just suppose"
the Kayakers were out in the middle of the night. they had no lights on .
that is against both the laws of the state of N.H and every other state in the union [ I wonder about california ] the Kayakers were wrong ...period .

the driver of the power boat was going from point A to point B and knew his way, was driving his boat in a lawful way ...the only way for the kayaker to make himself MORE difficult to see ,would be for him to be swimming ,head under water ,using a snorkle !!!
I think anyone who cannot see why this is clear,,,crystal clear , is also in line to file a law suit against Macdonalds for making them fat ....
I apologize to the skipper and his crew for the some subtle and some not so subtle assaults on your abilities ..It is also clear, crystal clear , that these people have Dain Bramage

[Tank151]

Originally Posted by Islander

WeirsBeachBoater and Paugus Bay Resident are sniping. Looking through the posts of people they don't like in hopes of finding something they can make into an attack.

The boat had gone from Meredith Bay to Bear Island and was headed back. If it was moving it had a speed, we just don't know what that speed was.

We do know they couldn't see an obstacle in their path before it was to late. Therefore they were going TO fast.

A Meredith resident is in prison right now. He was convicted of operator inattention because he hit another boat at night.

I believe the boater you're talking about is the guy who's family used to own Channel Marine? I believe he was Drinking (all day) and under the influence, hit the boat, stopped, didn't help or seek assistance, left the scene of the accident and then didn't report to a day or two later...

Different circumstances.... Doesn't take a whole lotta speed from a power boat to sever a Kayak in two.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

This should be taken to the speed limit forum as it brings up the old argument of paid lobbyists "educating" the non-boating population before the survey. It will be sad daywhen the bass boaters are encouraged to stay under 45 just to keep the safe yet "scary" big boats off the big lake.

IMHO, the topic has morphed because of the oft-repeated fact that "...there has never been a kayak struck by a speedboat in the history of Lake Winnipesaukee".

Now there is one—though we don't know the whole story. It's otherwise pretty well documented.

But except for here, no media account mentioned the second kayak involved. Traveling together and being silent in operation, the kayakers would have been aware of the approaching peril. Did the kayaks try to defend themselves using the required sound device? (Bell, horn, whistle?) Was the second kayak lighted in order to protect both boats? Was there a Safe Passage violation of the second kayak?

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

PBR, You see this is the "pro" speed limits way of trying to make this incident fit into their cry for help from all the boats "flying along". As you pointed out, there was never any mention of speed in this incident.

How fast does a speedboat have to go to break off the bow of a kayak—totaling it?

[NightWing]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Did the kayaks try to defend themselves using the required sound device? (Bell, horn, whistle?)

Sound producing devices are not required on manually propelled vessels.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

How fast does a speedboat have to go to break off the bow of a kayak—totaling it?

We can test the theory out. We just have to find out, whether the kayak in question was plastic or fiberglass.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by NightWing

Sound producing devices are not required on manually propelled vessels.

I'm reading that now—nor on unpowered sailboats—tricky wording. (And at the bottom of each page: "It's the LAW!")

Interesting exemption—which would leave a lot of boats defenseless in fog or darkness. Could they have been required in the past? I've attached a whistle to my PFDs for many years.

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

"...you provide the kayak I'll provide the boat..."

Ironically, I have two "unused-lately" kayaks available for a test: the frames are, respectively, wood and aluminum.

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

We can test the theory out. We just have to find out, whether the kayak in question was plastic or fiberglass.

I'd want to know what propeller was used first: there are "cleavers", "choppers", and "rakers" that would make short work of kevlar and aluminum.

[Irrigation Guy]

The BS is getting pretty thick here. To surmise that kayaks will be coming to the lake in greater numbers ,when 1 in 300 boats will no longer be traveling in excess of 45 miles per hour, is a huge stretch at the very least. I'm not a fan of the loud boats, but those loud fast boats are not what make my passengers cringe. Its just the shear numbers of boats, the vast majority traveling at speed of 20-35 miles per hours, that can be intimidating to some. The marine patrol has basically confirmed speeding boats are just not in the majority. When I see them its from a distance, and it doesn't bother me or my passengers in the least.

On the outset of this argument on speed, I thought I might be for it. But, as time goes on, and with the twisting of facts and details, those for it have really lost my respect. They obviously have a larger agenda, I feel its the noise.

[Evenstar]

Originally Posted by LocalRealtor

The BS is getting pretty thick here. To surmise that kayaks will be coming to the lake in greater numbers ,when 1 in 300 boats will no longer be traveling in excess of 45 miles per hour, is a huge stretch at the very least.

Again, I was talking about the overall effect on tourism - not just on Winni. The current bill, if it becomes law, will impose a speed limit on ALL NH lakes.

Squam has a speed limit - and I see way more paddlers on Squam than on Winni. And when ever I talk to other paddlers about paddling on Winni, they all say the same thing - too many fast boats there for them. So I don't see this as a stretch at all.

I also feel that your 1:300 ratio is way off. A speed limit will certainly affect way more than 1 boat in 300.