150’ Rule Applies to Rafts Too

[Pineedles]

I’m sitting on my porch watching boats speed by my lakefront within 150’ of our raft and buoy. I assume these boaters are ignorant of the rule, and think it applies only to the shoreline or other boats.

My children and grandchildren are swimming off the raft and god forbid they venture out any further. If the Marine patrol isn’t occupied elsewhere I suggest they spend some time in Center Harbor bay and have a look for themselves. I do see them here on occasion but this weekend it’s worse then ever.

[thinkxingu]

We haven't ventured past Moultonborough Bay today (yet), but it's easily the busiest day we've seen in seven summers from MB north.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I’m sitting on my porch watching boats speed by my lakefront within 150’ of our raft and buoy. I assume these boaters are ignorant of the rule, and think it applies only to the shoreline or other boats.

My children and grandchildren are swimming off the raft and god forbid they venture out any further. If the Marine patrol isn’t occupied elsewhere I suggest they spend some time in Center Harbor bay and have a look for themselves. I do see them here on occasion but this weekend it’s worse then ever.

It does only apply to the shore and other boats.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[upthesaukee]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

It does only apply to the shore and other boats.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Not so, GG.

Dave

270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water. –
I. Vessels shall be operated at headway speed only, while passing under all bridges.
II. (a) It shall be the duty of each vessel to keep to the right when vessels are approaching each other head on.
(b) When the courses of vessels are so far to the starboard of each other as not to be considered as approaching head on, they shall keep to the left.
III. When vessels are crossing courses or approaching each other in an oblique direction which may involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on its starboard side shall keep out of the way of the other, allowing the latter vessel to keep its course and speed.
IV. When vessels are running in the same direction and the vessel which is astern desires to pass the other, it shall do so only when sufficient distance between the vessels is available to avoid danger of collision, and at such a speed that its wake will not endanger the boat being passed or its occupants. No person operating a vessel shall abruptly change its course without first determining that it can safely be done without crossing immediately ahead of another vessel.
V. If, when vessels are approaching each other, either vessel fails to understand the course or intention of the other from any cause, such vessel or vessels shall immediately slow to a speed barely sufficient for steerage until the vessels have safely passed each other. If it appears the danger of collision is imminent both vessels shall stop or reverse and not proceed until such danger has been averted.
VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:
(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.
(2) Permitted swimming areas.
(3) Shore.
(4) Docks.
(5) Mooring fields.
(6) Other vessels.

[FlyingScot]

Even worse on the rafts are the parents who pull their kids well within 150'. I see at my house every weekend

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by upthesaukee

Not so, GG.

Dave

270-D:2 General Rules for Vessels Operating on Water. –

I. Vessels shall be operated at headway speed only, while passing under all bridges.

II. (a) It shall be the duty of each vessel to keep to the right when vessels are approaching each other head on.

(b) When the courses of vessels are so far to the starboard of each other as not to be considered as approaching head on, they shall keep to the left.

III. When vessels are crossing courses or approaching each other in an oblique direction which may involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on its starboard side shall keep out of the way of the other, allowing the latter vessel to keep its course and speed.

IV. When vessels are running in the same direction and the vessel which is astern desires to pass the other, it shall do so only when sufficient distance between the vessels is available to avoid danger of collision, and at such a speed that its wake will not endanger the boat being passed or its occupants. No person operating a vessel shall abruptly change its course without first determining that it can safely be done without crossing immediately ahead of another vessel.

V. If, when vessels are approaching each other, either vessel fails to understand the course or intention of the other from any cause, such vessel or vessels shall immediately slow to a speed barely sufficient for steerage until the vessels have safely passed each other. If it appears the danger of collision is imminent both vessels shall stop or reverse and not proceed until such danger has been averted.

VI. (a) To provide full visibility and control and to prevent their wake from being thrown into or causing excessive rocking to other boats, barges, water skiers, aquaplanes or other boats, rafts or floats, all vessels shall maintain headway speed when within 150 feet from:

(1) Rafts, floats, swimmers.

(2) Permitted swimming areas.

(3) Shore.

(4) Docks.

(5) Mooring fields.

(6) Other vessels.

Thanks for the rsa. Did that change within the last 10 years or so?


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by Top-Water

This is why they should ban scuba diving ........... its way to dangerous when people only cite the laws in a way that they only want to read them. Swim lines are also open bar to. No need to slow down by them either.

N.H. State law requires boaters to stay at least 150 feet away from a red flag with a white stripe or other flags in the water. They signal that scuba divers are in the area.

================================================== =
Really for full disclosure.

The full content of the law on this can be found here. It goes way beyond what is stated in post number 3

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/.../270-D-mrg.htm

I’m not citing a law in a way that I only want to read it. That’s how I remember the law, mainly from debates on this forum long ago. Perhaps I got bad info back then. Don’t assume I’m being an ahole.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

I’m not citing a law in a way that I only want to read it. That’s how I remember the law, mainly from debates on this forum long ago. Perhaps I got bad info back then. Don’t assume I’m being an ahole.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

About a year ago. Starting at your post# 28:

https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums...aft#post314970

[gillygirl]

My bad. Don’t even remember this thread from last year. Perhaps I should go to the doc for dementia testing. But you still don’t need to be nasty about it. And unlike some on here, I am happy to admit when I’m wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

Seriously!? I can assure you that if it was highlighted in the boat ed course, I would have remembered it. There is so much bad info on this site, you can’t wrap your head around it. What I remember is from years ago about littoral rights of shore front owners. I was told on this site that after I quarantine for 14 days at my southern home, that I’d have to quarantine for another 14 days there. Wrong. I’m sorry that I listened to bad info previously, and have learned my lesson on that. But I can assure you, I thought it was from a good source. And I would never pass that close to a raft at other than headway from a personal sense of responsibility.

TopWater, you really seem to have a personal grudge with me. Want to expound? Did I say things in other threads that offended you and you were just gleefully ready to pounce? I’ve certainly experienced that before here.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Gilly, brush off Top-Water—he's one of the forum's hypocrites who simultaneously complains about "useless" threads/posts and then loads them up with complaints and criticisms.

In my search for a jetski, I had no fewer than six private messages and two Facebook posts thanking me for the questions and apologizing on behalf of his bitching. In fact, here's one from LAST WEEK, six months after his idiocy.

Hope you're well, friend!



Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

Gilly, brush off Top-Water—he's one of the forum's hypocrites who simultaneously complains about "useless" threads/posts and then loads them up with complaints and criticisms.

In my search for a jetski, I had no fewer than six private messages and two Facebook posts thanking me for the questions and apologizing on behalf of his bitching. In fact, here's one from LAST WEEK, six months after his idiocy.

Hope you're well, friend!Attachment 16181

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Thanks, thinkxingu. The funny thing is, the post you just quoted was removed. Funny what’s allowed to stay and what’s removed.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

Thanks, thinkxingu. The funny thing is, the post you just quoted was removed. Funny what’s allowed to stay and what’s removed.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I get that the Webmaster is trying to keep peace here—and I think he's doing an overall fine job. I'm more surprised by the number of other members who don't speak out.

To each of the people who private messaged me, I asked the same thing: why not point it out and be part of the solution. To me, not saying anything is saying something.

In any case, let's move forward in the best way for the forum. Take care, and fingers crossed for good boating weather today—I've got friends coming up, and I'm hoping all the crazies from yesterday are hungover until at least dinner time!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

I get that the Webmaster is trying to keep peace here—and I think he's doing an overall fine job. I'm more surprised by the number of other members who don't speak out.

To each of the people who private messaged me, I asked the same thing: why not point it out and be part of the solution. To me, not saying anything is saying something.

In any case, let's move forward in the best way for the forum. Take care, and fingers crossed for good boating weather today—I've got friends coming up, and I'm hoping all the crazies from yesterday are hungover until at least dinner time!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Looks like you should have great weather. Have fun with your friends. Me? I’ve started predicting the daily thunderstorms down here by when I want to take the dog for a swim.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[thinkxingu]

Thanks friend, and good luck on your end!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[webmaster]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

Thanks, thinkxingu. The funny thing is, the post you just quoted was removed. Funny what’s allowed to stay and what’s removed.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

When you post about COVID-19 in a thread about the 150' rule in the Boating section it will be removed. I'm serious about keeping those comments out of other areas of this forum.

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by webmaster

When you post about COVID-19 in a thread about the 150' rule in the Boating section it will be removed. I'm serious about keeping those comments out of other areas of this forum.

Thanks for the explanation.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Island-Ho]

I constantly get boaters passing at planing speed between the end of my dock (where we like to swim) and a buoy only 75’ off the dock. So they are at most 60’ from the dock! What is it about 150’ these idiots don’t understand?

[Descant]

Originally Posted by Island-Ho

I constantly get boaters passing at planing speed between the end of my dock (where we like to swim) and a buoy only 75’ off the dock. So they are at most 60’ from the dock! What is it about 150’ these idiots don’t understand?

I think there may be a feeling that, since you don't have to slow down for a buoy, they're in open water and neglect to think about 150' from shore, concentrating on the buioy. There must be many places where this occurs.
Is the buoiy really necessary? If it were removed would boats stay farther away from your dock, or is it a narrow passage? Rumor is, that some buoys marked political friendships, not rocks. Current practice is to remove buoys that are determined to be unnecessary, or can be better marked some other way.

[WinnisquamZ]

Political friendships? Do you know of a few examples that have been removed?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[bigdog]

I have to ask b/c I actually don't know ????

I suspect 'rafts' are regulated by State permit, and there certain distance that the waterfront property can place there raft ? Otherwise, a property owner could place the raft 'any' distance from the shore they desire, and gaining possibly a 'no-wake' distance from their land.

Does someone on the forum know the 'maximum distance from shore the raft can be positioned ? Does the raft once placed, have to be inspected by the Marine patrol or a state/local authority, to determine if it is within the statues of the law ? Is there any state/local controlling authority who monitors the location of these rafts around the lake, otherwise anyone could just go buy a 'raft' and install it themselves, without taking out a Permit ? I have these same questions regarding 'Moorings' ???

Gee, I just think I thought of a new State Agency !

[TiltonBB]

The rules require that, unless a waiver is obtained, no raft may be placed more than 50 feet from shore or in more than 8 feet of water. Rafts must have an easily seen reflective surface on all sides and be marked with the owners name, address and telephone number.

[Winilyme]

Originally Posted by bigdog

I have to ask b/c I actually don't know ????

I suspect 'rafts' are regulated by State permit, and there certain distance that the waterfront property can place there raft ? Otherwise, a property owner could place the raft 'any' distance from the shore they desire, and gaining possibly a 'no-wake' distance from their land.

Does someone on the forum know the 'maximum distance from shore the raft can be positioned ? Does the raft once placed, have to be inspected by the Marine patrol or a state/local authority, to determine if it is within the statues of the law ? Is there any state/local controlling authority who monitors the location of these rafts around the lake, otherwise anyone could just go buy a 'raft' and install it themselves, without taking out a Permit ? I have these same questions regarding 'Moorings' ???

Gee, I just think I thought of a new State Agency !

That’s a raft of questions you’re asking right there.

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

The rules require that, unless a waiver is obtained, no raft may be placed more than 50 feet from shore or in more than 8 feet of water. Rafts must have an easily seen reflective surface on all sides and be marked with the owners name, address and telephone number.

I may be wrong but I believe rafts cannot be more than 150’ from Shore.

Dan

[Descant]

Originally Posted by WinnisquamZ

Political friendships? Do you know of a few examples that have been removed? ]

It's documented in this forum a while back, but I can't find the date on the Bizer chart in my desk. Nevertheless, there used to be two red buoys off Sawyer Point in Moultonboro. One was removed and MP posted on this Forum.

The concept of political buoys goes back further to when the Dept of Safety Commissioner would place additional buoys to push traffic farther out from specific locations. As I said, rumor and/or speculation, but I think credible. People who have one of these markers are unlikely to complain. Those of an older generation and some local knowledge might wonder why a particular buoy is in place.

[Woodsy]

I used to get so twisted up about 150' rule violations... but realistically, its a guideline as just about everyone will not estimate the distance correctly on the water.

So unless they are danger close... I don't get worked up about it.

Woodsy

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

The rules require that, unless a waiver is obtained, no raft may be placed more than 50 feet from shore or in more than 8 feet of water. Rafts must have an easily seen reflective surface on all sides and be marked with the owners name, address and telephone number.

Hi Tilton,

Please forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think you're referring to the rules in proposed legislation that they tried to pass in 2010, but it failed. Following are the current rules as far as I can determine:

Saf-C 404.09 Swim Rafts.

(a) Each swim raft placed in public waters shall display the owners name and shore front address plainly marked on the outside of such raft.

(b) Each swim raft placed in public waters shall display 12 square inches of reflective material at least half way up on all sides of the raft.


Source. #6092, eff 9-19-95, EXPIRED: 9-19-03


New. #8107, EMERGENCY, eff 6-22-04, EXPIRES: 12-19-04; ss by #8172, eff 9-21-04; rpld by #8614, eff 4-25-06


New. #10293, eff 3-20-13

[Pineedles]

Our raft is in no more than 7’ of water and only 50’ from the shoreline. And I just watched another idiot zoom past. And no, there is no traffic that is crowding him toward the shoreline.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

Our raft is in no more than 7’ of water and only 50’ from the shoreline. And I just watched another idiot zoom past. And no, there is no traffic that is crowding him toward the shoreline.

Not sure of your family's swimming ability, but 50' is awfully close. Maybe take advantage of the 150' limit and move her out some?

[Descant]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Not sure of your family's swimming ability, but 50' is awfully close. Maybe take advantage of the 150' limit and move her out some?

That could mean headway speed out 300' from shore. Pretty aggressive in some areas, say where there is a straight line course between an outer buoy and a common destination such as public docks. As is often the case here, what seems obvious to the OP seems like incomplete info to the unfamiliar reader.

[umbrellapoint]

Nerding out just a little bit....

The expected number of boats that will buzz your swim dock per day, on average =

[1 -
(
Probability that the average boater is informed about the 150' rule *
Probability that the average boater can reasonably estimate 150' *
Probability that the average boater cares to observed it *
)
] *
total number of boats that pass by your place per day, on average


Assuming a high probability for each case ( e.g. 95% ), still means that ~15% of boats will not obey the 150' rule. If roughly 100 boats pass by your swim raft on a busy Saturday, you'd should expect 15 or so, on average, to be too close. This would not be evenly spread across the day, but concentrated in the main boating hours ( ~12PM - 5PMish ), so you would see a couple per hour too close --- and that is with a high % of conformity/adherence to the rules.

If there is a high rental weekend, with a less experienced boating population, the actual probabilities may be closer to 80%. The would mean a little less than half of the boaters break the 150' rule. With 100 boats/day, this means ~50 boats too close and an almost constant stream of boats buzzing your raft during peak boating times.

You can pretty much estimate the actual probabilities just by counting the boats that go by your place vs the boats that go by "too close".

To lower the number of boats that break the 150' rule, you can address each of the above probabilities:

1.) increased testing / certification to increase the chance someone, who may be an experienced boater, but inexperienced in NH, is aware of the 150' rule.

2.) additional markers/indicators, particularly in high traffic areas, to better delineate 150' from closest object.

3.) increase MP presence/enforcement in areas with both greatest abuse of 150' rule and most chance of injury and/or property damage by the 150' rule not being observed.

Each of the three costs the state time and money and benefits accrue mostly to a very few # of waterfront property owners, of which a significant portion live out of state and do not vote. So, you would need a way, other than voting, to incentivize the state the address these issues.

[Descant]

Time for the potato launchers. Or, just anchor a canoe 150' out from the raft. So much simpler than complaining on the Forum, and much more effective.

[WinnisquamZ]

What would it be like if each lakeshore owner created a 150’ marker and placed them in the water along the shoreline. Interesting idea I do say


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[thinkxingu]

I'm not good at estimating distance. What do people use to even judge 150'? I'm confident that, though I stay a fair distance away from most everything, that it's not always 150'.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Barney Bear]

150 feet is one half of the length of a football field. There is a No Wake Buoy positioned 150' away from the Marine Patrol docks in Glendale harbor located so folks can see what this distance looks like. 🐻

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by Barney Bear

150 feet is one half of the length of a football field. There is a No Wake Buoy positioned 150' away from the Marine Patrol docks in Glendale harbor located so folks can see what this distance looks like.

Thanks for the tip on the no wake buoy—I'll check it out the next time I'm at a public dock in the north.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[chasedawg]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

Thanks for the tip on the no wake buoy—I'll check it out the next time I'm at a public dock in the north.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

When you travel by your "boatie's" to Pier 19 to get your ice cream there is a NO Wake Buoy off Pier 19 marina marking 150' distance. Check it out.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

I'm not good at estimating distance. What do people use to even judge 150'? I'm confident that, though I stay a fair distance away from most everything, that it's not always 150'.

Twice a 75 foot ski tow line.
Most private docks are about 40'. Look at one holding a pencil to mark the 40', with your thumb, then "walk it out" four times. Is there enough dock space? posts are usually 8 feet apart; count the posts.
You an calibrate yourself by driving at high speed. When people start yelling at you, that's less than 150'.

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by chasedawg

When you travel by your "boatie's" to Pier 19 to get your ice cream there is a NO Wake Buoy off Pier 19 marina marking 150' distance. Check it out.

I was actually there today. Maybe a dumb question, but does the buoy mark 150' to the closest dock/fixed object or land?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[chasedawg]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

I was actually there today. Maybe a dumb question, but does the buoy mark 150' to the closest dock/fixed object or land?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Closes dock or public dock where fireboat is tied up.

How was the ice cream?

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by chasedawg

Closes dock or public dock where fireboat is tied up.

How was the ice cream?

Would you believe I didn't get any?! It was ROUGH out there this morning, so we just went in for someone to fill up. My morning wasn't sweet-free, however—we hit Wolfeboro and grabbed blueberry/lemon donuts. Gosh-darn were they good. Divine.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[XCR-700]

Some observations based on what I have read in this thread:

• I personally think many boaters are NOT actually aware of the rule and/or some confuse the 150’ distance, as I have often heard it cited as the 50’ rule (likely adding to some of the problems/confusion)

• I think most people struggle with judging 150’ distance, visually its not and easy length to estimate, especially while moving. Though some of the tips like dock length are good/helpful.

• While I have personally suffered some expensive cosmetic damage to my boats from excessive wake and boats passing by too closely, I do also think many land/home owners are often complaining about boats being too close when they are actually the full 150’ out, its just not enough distance in some cases.

• At the same time, if every home owner put a raft out at the legal limit, the lake would become very difficult to boat on as many common routes would become virtual no wake zones.

• While I don’t think most boaters are ignoring the rule, there are likely some that just don’t care, and when you think its a blatant act, call the marine patrol.

• I think the 150’ should be treated as a target rather than a strict number, boaters need to focus on overall safety first (which absolutely includes distances from others, and objects and land) but if they are expending too much of their time at the helm calculating specific distance, other safety concerns will suffer and we need to strike a balance with many competing concerns. This one is a tough balance, its like the 1 car length for every ten miles per hour of road speed/safe following distance. Its clearly a good best practice that would reduce accidents and save lives and unfortunately at the very same time it will distract drivers and tax some of them to their limits making their overall operation less safe. Sorry, some people cannot juggle and ride the unicycle at the same time as playing the star spangled banner on the kazoo,,, Its not a perfect world.

• While a novel idea, every homeowner putting out 150’ markers would quickly become problematic, I can see all the cases where someone missed on and then got the line tangled in the prop and causing damage and maybe disabled boats.

• Based on the concept above, it might be interesting to see if the GPS folks can add a 150’ distance warning on their maps in a red outline or a dotted line or something like that to let boaters know where they are, but this could also become a distraction as discussed above. Tough balance to strike.

• And finally, if everyone paid attention to safety first, were reasonably respectful, and did not fly into a rage when someone makes a mistake that no one was harmed, then we might all have a better experience at the lake.

Just a thought,,,

[Hillcountry]

Good thoughts but they will never happen. There will always be a huge percentage of “captain idiots” on any lake compared to polite law abiding ones...just today’s human nature and the rising tide of self-importance in people.

[ACME on the Broads]

Very good points, thank you!

Here's another............where the heck is Marine Patrol? Longtime residents and boaters (over 35 years) and simply can't remember ever seeing so few Marine Patrol vessels/officers visible?

150' rule, a joke; there are a majority of boaters who don't understand the rule and can't comprehend safety! So many first time or novice boaters. With Covid, new adventures seem to be the norm.........let's go to Winni and rent a boat.

As for boat traffic....this weekend the lake appeared as it did in the early 2000s; that is, big flashy boats everywhere, the poker run on Sat morning had over 70 performance boats racing to CH, (beautiful to see). Speed limit? What speed limit? So many Waverunners in formations with 10-14 in a group, and boat rafting the likes of which seemed like the largest floating marina ever.

Oh well, hope everyone stays safe, enjoys and respects our beautiful lake.

Best to all!

[tis]

We wonder where MP is too. In the old days they used to talk about cowboys on Lake Winni. Well guess what, it was nothing compared to what it is today. It's the Wild West out there.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by ACME on the Broads

Very good points, thank you!

Here's another............where the heck is Marine Patrol? Longtime residents and boaters (over 35 years) and simply can't remember ever seeing so few Marine Patrol vessels/officers visible?

150' rule, a joke; there are a majority of boaters who don't understand the rule and can't comprehend safety! So many first time or novice boaters. With Covid, new adventures seem to be the norm.........let's go to Winni and rent a boat.

As for boat traffic....this weekend the lake appeared as it did in the early 2000s; that is, big flashy boats everywhere, the poker run on Sat morning had over 70 performance boats racing to CH, (beautiful to see). Speed limit? What speed limit? So many Waverunners in formations with 10-14 in a group, and boat rafting the likes of which seemed like the largest floating marina ever.

Oh well, hope everyone stays safe, enjoys and respects our beautiful lake.

Best to all!

Yeah. Lots of Sat am boat traffic. By my second cuo of coffee, it was quiet again.

[Lil' Barndoor Guy]

The driver of a rented Seadoo out of Backbay in Wolfeboro was doing full speed dounuts around the 150' distance buoy in front of the Wolfeboro town docks.
Boaters at the town docks were waving him off and yelling at him. He flipped the bird and sped off, circled Wolfeboro Bay and then came in full speed to the bridge, only slowing to clear his head on the concrete.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by Descant

Yeah. Lots of Sat am boat traffic. By my second cuo of coffee, it was quiet again.

Personally I have completely given up on Saturdays during the busy season, its just too busy, too crazy and not fun for me as the one in our boat who must constantly keep an eye out 360 degrees for whats next.

Its not just a tolerance thing, which I will freely admit as I get older its lacking,,, For me its a matter of how much will I enjoy it, and with time not being an unlimited commodity, I chose not to squander it on a day I know I'm not likely to enjoy.

Others clearly love the crowds and for them a busy day at Braun is what they call fun. I hope they actually enjoy it, but they will have to do so without me and my no concert level music boat ;-)

Edit: just thinking, in the almost year since we got this boat, I dont think I have even once turned the radio on,,, I should probably test it before the 1 year mark on the warranty. I am usually just very happy to hear the sounds of motors and water slapping the hull while anchored, I never have the radio on,,, I guess we each have our quirks, and I'm sure I have more than the average person.

[Cal Coon]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Personally I have completely given up on Saturdays during the busy season, its just too busy, too crazy and not fun for me as the one in our boat who must constantly keep an eye out 360 degrees for whats next.

Its not just a tolerance thing, which I will freely admit as I get older its lacking,,, For me its a matter of how much will I enjoy it, and with time not being an unlimited commodity, I chose not to squander it on a day I know I'm not likely to enjoy.

Others clearly love the crowds and for them a busy day at Braun is what they call fun. I hope they actually enjoy it, but they will have to do so without me and my no concert level music boat ;-)

Edit: just thinking, in the almost year since we got this boat, I dont think I have even once turned the radio on,,, I should probably test it before the 1 year mark on the warranty. I am usually just very happy to hear the sounds of motors and water slapping the hull while anchored, I never have the radio on,,, I guess we each have our quirks, and I'm sure I have more than the average person.

Agreed. I could care less about having a radio on the boat. However, if I do have a radio on my boat, (which I do), I do want it to work! I just don't care if it's on or not...!!

[ApS]

When a skier falls, it takes about a minute for the towing boat to return to them. (Depending on boat size, type, and speed).

Even if the skier catches up with a ski to correctly signal his position to approaching boats, the towing boat would still need 300+ feet to slow, make the turn, guide the towrope, and return to the skier. This leaves the skier dangerously vulnerable, and hundreds of feet from the safety of the towing boat.

Remember how some Winnipesaukee boaters can't see navigation markers?

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I used to get so twisted up about 150' rule violations... but realistically, its a guideline as just about everyone will not estimate the distance correctly on the water.

So unless they are danger close... I don't get worked up about it.

Woodsy

I'd try.

[XCR-700]

I think the 1 minute estimate may by low unless the driver is very aggressive. Regardless of how long it actually takes, I know when you are the one in the water, it can feel like a very long time,,,

[whalebackpoint'r]

The 150' rule is probably the most frequently violated rule in the book. It's not easy to judge that distance on the water. Here are a couple of examples I use:
1. 150' is half the length of a football field.

2. It is twice the distance of a 75' official ski rope length.

You also have to factor in the width of your boat and anything that is on the other side of your boat. Have fun and be safe.

[iw8surf]

Originally Posted by ApS

When a skier falls, it takes about a minute for the towing boat to return to them. (Depending on boat size, type, and speed).

Even if the skier catches up with a ski to correctly signal his position to approaching boats, the towing boat would still need 300+ feet to slow, make the turn, guide the towrope, and return to the skier. This leaves the skier dangerously vulnerable, and hundreds of feet from the safety of the towing boat.

Remember how some Winnipesaukee boaters can't see navigation markers?


I'd try.

And remember. Power turning and rushing back does absolutely nothing to shorten that in comparison to just throwing it in neutral, turning 180 and heading back to the skier. All you’re doing power turning is sending a wave into shore and ruining the water for your skier.

[tis]

I think that and no wake are the two most frequently violated, Whale.

An MP officer once told me if you can read the bow numbers on the boat you are too close. If you can't you are 150'. I think it might depend on your eyesight though.

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by tis

I think that and no wake are the two most frequently violated, Whale.

An MP officer once told me if you can read the bow numbers on the boat you are too close. If you can't you are 150'. I think it might depend on your eyesight though.

The reality is that 150' is more conceptual than exact—there's no way to measure on-the-spot—but, like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said, "[MP] know it when [they] see it."

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[ApS]

At 6:30 this very calm Friday morning, a skier went by, "skiing" on his back. He then returned to upright--skiing barefoot.

It would have been impressive, but the skier had no control in l/r direction, and the boat's operator was only 50-feet off my dock.

(And even closer to a neighbor's raft, and had no "observer" aboard).

[Winilyme]

Originally Posted by ApS

At 6:30 this very calm Friday morning, a skier went by, "skiing" on his back. He then returned to upright--skiing barefoot.

It would have been impressive, but the skier had no control in l/r direction, and the boat's operator was only 50-feet off my dock.

(And even closer to a neighbor's raft, and had no "observer" aboard).

Goes to show that talent and intelligence don’t always coexist in the same individual.

[tis]

I saw them. They started here too. That's how they get up when they barefoot, starting out on their backs. I guess I could say that is one way. You can also drop your ski. He is really good. They were here a couple of weeks ago too. But you are right, they didn't have an observer then and they didn't have one today. I have to admit I enjoyed watching them. In my younger day I skied barefoot once and it is so hard on your feet it wasn't for me. The water felt like stones. I have always admired bare footers.

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by tis

I saw them. They started here too. That's how they get up when they barefoot, starting out on their backs. I guess I could say that is one way. You can also drop your ski. He is really good. They were here a couple of weeks ago too. But you are right, they didn't have an observer then and they didn't have one today. I have to admit I enjoyed watching them. In my younger day I skied barefoot once and it is so hard on your feet it wasn't for me. The water felt like stones. I have always admired bare footers.

‘Tis,

Are you sure that wasn’t you out there Water skiing and teasing APS!

Dan

[tis]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

‘Tis,

Are you sure that wasn’t you out there Water skiing and teasing APS!

Dan

I wish!!!!

[Cal Coon]

Originally Posted by tis

I saw them. They started here too. That's how they get up when they barefoot, starting out on their backs. I guess I could say that is one way. You can also drop your ski. He is really good. They were here a couple of weeks ago too. But you are right, they didn't have an observer then and they didn't have one today. I have to admit I enjoyed watching them. In my younger day I skied barefoot once and it is so hard on your feet it wasn't for me. The water felt like stones. I have always admired bare footers.

I have always admired the barefoot skier as well. If you can water ski barefoot, (chances are) you know what you are doing, (as well as your driver). They probably could have come within 10' of an "obstacle" knowing what they are doing without a problem, however it may not look like it to an on looker. As far as the water feeling like stones on your feet, I would imagine it can't feel to good on the back either!!!

[ApS]

Maybe someone should clue Garmin as to NH's regulations?

Maybe someone could devise a $15 plastic float that looks like a Jersey barrier?

Originally Posted by Cal Coon

I have always admired the barefoot skier as well. If you can water ski barefoot, (chances are) you know what you are doing, (as well as your driver). They probably could have come within 10' of an "obstacle" knowing what they are doing without a problem, however it may not look like it to an on looker. As far as the water feeling like stones on your feet, I would imagine it can't feel to good on the back either!!!

Bringing back...
"An inch is as good as a mile"?

[tis]

Originally Posted by Cal Coon

I have always admired the barefoot skier as well. If you can water ski barefoot, (chances are) you know what you are doing, (as well as your driver). They probably could have come within 10' of an "obstacle" knowing what they are doing without a problem, however it may not look like it to an on looker. As far as the water feeling like stones on your feet, I would imagine it can't feel to good on the back either!!!

Yes, if you hit a small piece of something your foot would be hurt badly!

[fatlazyless]

For $16.15 you can get a giant inflatable banana and anchor it strategically to keep water skiers away, way away, out there.

Except, with the free shipping and the recent mail slowdown, it could take three weeks to get to you. (It's in the mail.) So, better to hit your local transfer station and retrieve an old plastic picnic cooler, or something that is a bright color, large, and floats ...... like a bright orange, Ozark Trail picnic cooler.