Be aware - LSR for Prohibiting Rafting

[Coastal Laker]

I'm sorry to admit I've not had much of an opportunity to visit winni.com recently (never mind post). I refrained from participating on the speed limit issue but did make my opinions known to the appropriate House committee members.

You may want to be aware of an LSR sponsored by Carl Johnson. It hasn't gone very far yet: on the topic of prohibiting rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.

(A raft is three or more boats tied together - not two)

No need to wait for this to become a house bill before expressing your opinions on the matter, at least to the sponsors. Just thought I'd make you folks aware of what is in the works.

[Bear Islander]

I wonder what the reasoning is for this LSR.

Is there a problem beyond the obvious reason that people don't want boats rafting in front of their homes? If boats raft along an undeveloped stretch of shore is there some kind of harm?

[PROPELLER]

Audiofn, I agree with you that there are those incidents that you reference & that could be part of the motivation. However, in all the summer weekends I have rafted with friends & my experience with rafting on Winni is extensive, I have never witnessed trash, loud music(in fact the people I raft with do not even play the stereo at all) or any other undesirable antics to be a problem.

I have witnessed a couple incidents, I was part of one, where a property owner simply was not happy that WE WERE IN HIS COVE. We are never disrespectful, play loud music, throw trash in the lake, etc. And where ever we go there are usually other groups rafting separate from my group & I have never witnessed that behavior from the other groups either.

I will qualify this by saying I never go to the 2 most popular spots to raft on the weekend, Braun Bay & the West Alton Sandbar, so maybe it goes on there but these 2 areas are not in front of any houses either.

At least based on my own experience any complaints about rafting & the problems that come with it are grossly exaggerated.

[PROPELLER]

Coastal Laker: Could this come up this 2005 session? I have reviewed all the LSR's on the NH General Court website & did not see this LSR. It was my understanding that the LSR's have to be submitted by a certain date in the fall for the upcoming session & after that the list is closed until the following year.

[Belmont Resident]

More and more of the lake shore are being developed. Along with this is the ever increasing number of boaters on the lake. There really isn't a solution as we see this complaint each summer. The lake is for everyone to enjoy not just the ones who own the homes along it's shore. Although I agree with landowners being upset with loud music, trash and disrespect I also feel that we all have a right to use the lake.

[Just Sold]

You think the waterfront is being developed? Just go to West Alton and you can find many non water front lots (on the lake side of Rt 11) on the market today. And it appears from the many pink survey ribbons on other undeveloped land that they too may soon be available as buildable lots.

[Bear Islander]

I can understand property owners not liking rafting if it's a regular thing in front of their property. I don't have this problem, if you want to raft near my place you will need really big bumpers and Dramamine.

But isn't there another way to address the problem than banning rafting on the entire lake. Something like no rafting within 300 feet of a dock.

[upthesaukee]

Bear Islander, great idea, 300 ft from a dock... of course what that really means is about 75 feet, which is about twice the distance normally seen with the 150 foot rule...which is a whole 'nother thread...couldn't resist it...the snow is getting to me...

[upthesaukee]

Here's the reference and the sponsoring individuals.

2005-S-0907-Rprohibiting rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.Sponsors: (Prime) Carl R Johnson
Michael D Whalley
Howard C Dickinson
Betsey L Patten

I tried to find some text on this but kept getting error messages. Time for bed.

[Mee-n-Mac]

I wonder why this is being introduced. The are ways to enact NRZs already. It would seem to me that if these were effective then a remedy exists now that isn't any different from what is being proposed. The existing method looks better to me in that it allows rafting in those areas where nobody minds. If enforcement of existing NRZs is the issue, then I don't see how a lake-wide NRZ will make a difference.

ps - could the existing NRZ regs be changed (more distance) to allow more relief for home owners ??? Perhaps and maybe this would be a better answer (if one is needed) than a lake-wide NRZ.

[upthesaukee]

In case anyone is wondering, Prime sponsor is Senator Johnson of Merideth, and the co-sponsors are rep. Whalley from Alton, rep. Patten from Moultonboro, and rep. Dickinson from Center Conway. Still can't find the text on this proposal.

[b8tcaster]

The text is now available on this bill. My guess is he will have more support for this bill than his speed limit bill. His hometown has discussed no rafting zones on the lake and ill bet he has the Loon Preservation Society and others willing to show up in force to get this bill passed. I dont raft so I dont have a dog in this hunt but I would be willing to support opposition to this bill simply because I believe it is designed to benefit a few lakefront property owners at the expense of most lake users

[upthesaukee]

Note that they are repealing other RSA sections that deal with rafting. Also note that 270:42 defines a raft as "2 or more boats", not 3.

Here's the text:

SB 155-FN – AS INTRODUCED

2005 SESSION

05-0907

03/01

SENATE BILL 155-FN

AN ACT prohibiting rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.

SPONSORS: Sen. Johnson, Dist 2; Rep. Whalley, Belk 5; Rep. Dickinson, Carr 1; Rep. Patten, Carr 4


COMMITTEE: Transportation and Interstate Cooperation

ANALYSIS

This bill prohibits rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

05-0907

03/01

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Five

AN ACT prohibiting rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Rafting; Prohibition, Enforcement. Amend RSA 270:43 to read as follows:

270:43 [Rules] Rafting Prohibited; Enforcement.

I. [The commissioner of safety, pursuant to RSA 541-A, shall adopt rules which shall be binding on all persons owning, leasing or operating boats and which:

(a) Further define and regulate the practice of rafting of boats; and

(b) Designate prohibited locations or times, in or during which the size of rafts is limited and a minimum distance is required between boats and rafts in accordance with the provisions of RSA 270:44. Such prohibited locations and times shall include:

(1) The following locations on Lake Winnipesaukee, which shall be more specifically defined in such rules:

(i) The Kona mansion area, so-called, in the town of Moultonborough;

(ii) Small's cove, in the town of Alton; and

(iii) Wentworth cove, southwest of Governor's island bridge in the town of Gilford; and

(2) Such other locations and times as the commissioner of safety shall prescribe.] Rafting is prohibited.

II. The provisions of this subdivision [and the rules adopted under this section] shall be enforced by any law enforcement officer having jurisdiction in the area in which any violation of such provisions [or rules] occurs or by the commissioner of safety and his or her duly authorized agents, who shall have all the powers of a peace officer in any county of the state regarding such enforcement.

2 Rafting; Penalty. Amend RSA 270:46 to read as follows:

270:46 Penalty. A person shall be guilty of a violation if he or she:

I. Fails to comply with the provisions of this subdivision [or any rule adopted thereunder];

II. Refuses to cooperate with a law enforcement officer in the determination of compliance with the provisions of this subdivision [or any rule adopted thereunder]; or

III. Refuses to move the boat which he or she is operating or in charge of in order to comply with the provisions of this subdivision [or any rule adopted thereunder].

3 Repeal. The following are repealed:

I. RSA 21-P:14, II(l), relative to regulation of rafting of boats.

II. RSA 270:42, VI, relative to definition of single boat.

III. RSA 270:44, relative to size of rafts, separation of rafts, and single boats.

IV. RSA 270:45, relative to exceptions to time and location prohibitions.

4 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2006.



And here's the docket info:

SB155 Docket

Bill Title:prohibiting rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.
DateBodyDescription1/6/2005SIntroduced and Referred to Transportation and Interstate Cooperation1/27/2005SHearing: February 2, 2005, Room 101, LOB, 9:20 a.m.

[Belmont Resident]

No mention of why someone would go to such lengths.
To me and many whom I've talked with it is just another selfish gesture by those who own property on the lake and believe they also own the lake.
It really is sad to see the amount of arrogance that some people with money have brought to the lake. This isn’t always true but I tend to see it more and more as the years go buy.
The truth is that our state is getting more and more populated, so is the lake.
We can never go back to that peaceful lake of yesteryear. These same people who complain are the worst offenders. They build these huge houses in place of the peaceful camps that used to be along the lake then they want their piece and quiet.
Almost as bad as Mr. Fay backing a bill limiting speeds, all the while selling boats capable of easily exceeding that same speed limit.

[FormulaOutlaw]

Just wanted to express my respect for the views taken in this Thread.

Per usual, it is a few trying to ruin a good time for many.

It sounds as though the "bad incidents" are much too rare to call for this extreme measure to be considered, much less acted upon. Please keep this thread up to date as to any information available. Thank you.

[b8tcaster]

I am going to try and attend but not quite sure what approach should be taken in opposition to this bill. Anybody have some suggestions as to how to make an intelleigent argument against this bill. I dont raft but once again I feel this is not right.

[Will]

I dont know if you alton people know, but your very own representative is sponsoring it. I believe his name is Michael Whalley maybe, i may be wrong. Anyways I truly believe this is a totally rediculous bill, first my boat cant make noise, now im not allowed to even tie up to my friends, come on people. This is a serious case of BS. I dont know if anyone else sees it but this is heading down a bad road. Soon enough Winni will be run like a catholic school. I mean come on the lake is about fun and enjoyment. If people dont like boats rafting off their property from the legal distance than they shouldnt have waterfront property. Oh yah and just to let all you alton people know, I emailed your rep about this, he never responded. American Polotics at work once again. Pretty sad when a rep cant even email me back about a question, its ok I'll continue to pay my taxes so he can get paid.

Great System

Cheers, while you still can,

Will

[JDeere]

Same old crowd with the same old arguments. I do not care about rafting one way or the other but if I were inclined to take a position I would at least do my homework and find out the real reason for the new legislation. I very much doubt the state is trying to protect homeowners. What is the reason to ban rafting, noise, drinking, inability to MP to pull up alongside a boat………………….I do not know. Does anyone of the folks opposed to the ban know the reason or do you just enjoy bashing anything that involves change?

[Alton Bay]

Originally Posted by upthesaukee

Here's the reference and the sponsoring individuals.

2005-S-0907-Rprohibiting rafting of boats on lakes and ponds.Sponsors: (Prime) Carl R Johnson
Michael D Whalley
Howard C Dickinson
Betsey L Patten

I tried to find some text on this but kept getting error messages. Time for bed.

Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Descant]

Originally Posted by Alton Bay

Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Not sure where you're going with this. Sen Carl Johnson is deceased. The legislature named a Meredith cove after him (2016?) for outstanding representation of lake interests. Rep. Whalley (r-Alton) is also deceased, another great supporter of lake issues and an environmentalist. Rep Betsy Patton retired from the General Court many years ago. All were well known to me as supporters of lake issues.

[thinkxingu]

Talk about "thread from the grave" award. 17 years?!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk