| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 85.1 | Watch out for the Wskiers! | TOMCAT::SUTER | Water is meant to ski on! | Mon Jul 25 1988 11:27 | 14 |
|
Chuck,
> Apparently, I was not the ONLY one to object to seeing 22 foot
> Checkmates barrelling up and down the lake over the 4th of July
Unfortunately any HP restriction is going to hurt one of my
favorite crowds... The Water Skiers! If you set a 200 hp limit
on the lake, how many tournament ski boats will be legal? None!
The only way around this would be a speed limit rather than HP
restriction.
Rick
|
| 85.2 | repl | CSSE32::APRIL | Winter Wanderer | Mon Jul 25 1988 12:48 | 21 |
|
> Unfortunately any HP restriction is going to hurt one of my
> favorite crowds... The Water Skiers! If you set a 200 hp limit
> on the lake, how many tournament ski boats will be legal? None!
> The only way around this would be a speed limit rather than HP
> restriction.
Rick,
Have no fear .... THAT is the reason I got on the committee ! When the
discussion first came up most people wanted a 80 HP restriction. I then
got up and told them that HP was not the best way because there are
different types of boats (outboards, IO's, SKI Boats) and that a pure
HP restriction would be detrimental. What people really want is a
way to outlaw speed boats (yes mike your 60MPH Baja would not be
welcome). They don't want a cigarette boat or a big cuddy-cabin
type boat.
Chuck
|
| 85.3 | I feel the need for speed! | CRISTA::CERIA | | Mon Jul 25 1988 14:04 | 23 |
| I think a speed limit would be a reasonable compromise! Outlawing
speed boats is ridicoulous! We don't outlaw Corvettes and Porshe's
cause they go to fast... we control it with enforcing the speed
limits, do we cut off our heads cause we have a head-ache.
Chuck,
Don't you have a INDY 400?, that is twice as fast as any jetski, a
sno-mobile on a trail is less visible than a jetski on a open lake.
I have been on lake Winnipesaukee for 6 years, I find that most
people who have bigger and/or faster boats pay more attention to boating
laws than the guy with the little boat. Jetski's... personally I
love them, when I see a jetski I'll make the biggest wake I can
so they can jump them, If they come within a 150', no problem as
long as he doesn't pose a danger to me or me boat. If everybody
obeyed boating laws, mostly the 150' rule there wouldn't be any
problems. As far as jetski noise, how many jetski's do you see after
10:00pm.
I can't drive 55
Jeff
|
| 85.4 | Snowmobile = jet-ski? | MAPLE::JPETERS | John Peters, DTN 266-4391 | Mon Jul 25 1988 14:35 | 4 |
| I also observe, Chuck, that with your impassioned defense of
snowmobiles, it's pretty odd to see you dumping on jet skis. It's
about as close as you can come on water to a snowmobile.
J
|
| 85.5 | | PSYCHE::DECAROLIS | GPX User | Mon Jul 25 1988 15:43 | 15 |
| Re: 3
Jeff, I agree with you 100%. Just recently though, someone
was telling me he was forced to buy a 130 vs. 160 inboard due
to restrictions on his parents lake in CT. Such laws unfortunately
have already been enforced, though the size of the lake is
probably a factor. I doubt they would enforce such restrictions
at Winni.
Banning Jet Skis??! I'd be very surprized to see that happen
in either state.
Jeanne
|
| 85.6 | Restrict by driver behavior, NOT boat type/size/power. | MENTOR::REG | Just browsing; HONEST, I'm BROKE ! | Mon Jul 25 1988 16:05 | 23 |
|
Horse power is easy to identify and restrict against, too bad
since it doesn't necessarily mean that it will be used irresponsibly.
How dangerous can a 14ft aluminium boat with a 5 hp outboard be ?
How safe can a 400 HP ciggarette be ? The answer to both questions
is probably,
"Nothing to do with the boat, its a function of the driver."
I'd recommend that you work toward publishing the rules and posting
them at every access, including private ramps and beaches so that
visitors can review them. Speed and space violations should be
grounds for (say 30 day) banning of the driver, NOT the boat. Fines
won't do it, whats $20 out of the vacation fund ?, a minor tax.
Loss of use/access is a much bigger blow. I don't know about
enforcement, presumably the ban/suspension could be defined in terms
that would make it a trespassing violation to drive while
banned/suspended (?).
Reg
This is all very sad, it shouldn't have to come to this, etc.,
etc., oh well.
|
| 85.7 | | SMAUG::LINDQUIST | | Mon Jul 25 1988 16:06 | 10 |
| < Note 85.5 by PSYCHE::DECAROLIS "GPX User" >
Banning Jet Skis??! I'd be very surprized to see that happen
in either state.
It is my understanding that New Hampshire has already banned
Jet Skis on lakes of less than a certain size. Perhaps I was
dreaming, but I don't think so.
- Lee
|
| 85.8 | more stuff | CSSE32::APRIL | Winter Wanderer | Mon Jul 25 1988 17:12 | 39 |
|
Well, I've researched this somewhat and have found out the
following:
Personel Watercraft (Jetski's, Wetjets, etc.) are banned from
any lake/pond in NH under 100 acres.
Legislation will be introduced and voted on this fall in VT.
to BAN all personel watercraft in the state.
To J_PETERS: I don't see any comparison between a Jetski and a
Snowmobile at least in the manner that I run them. You are
a 'captured audience' to a jetski but a snowmobile is meant
to run on trails SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED AND APPROVED (via
landowner permission) for them.
To JEFF: Yes, I own an Indy 400 and yes, there is a problem with
speeds generated on trails in the winter. In fact, next
season there will be a 45 MPH speed limit covering the entire
state of Vermont. NH has a 45 MPH limit on all state trails
(Club trails not groomed by state machines are exempt).
To all: I agree that the problem lies with the operator of the vehicle
not the vehicle itself but the problem is ENFORCEMENT ! There's
never a problem when there is an officer around but when he's
not there ..... well the theory is that if you have restrictions
(HP,SIZE,Weight-to-HP-ratio) to limit them to 45MPH then you've
in essence, done the job. Also, as someone mentioned, HP is
visable. If you see someone on the lake with twin 150's and
the HP limit for outboards is 125 then you can call the Derby
office and they can dispatch an officer and there is visable
proof of an offense (not possible if you observe a boat going
over the 45 MPH limit but you cannot prove it).
Chuck
|
| 85.9 | ENFORCEMENT | ANT::MBREAULT | If I can't ski, I won't play | Mon Jul 25 1988 17:33 | 35 |
|
Chuck,
You certainly have a dilhema, (sp?). Talking of horsepower/size
and speed limits is easy and don't get me wrong as the lake I
frequent has many if not more of the same problems you're seeing,
*BUT*....I think the problem here has only been touched apon...
Making restrictions is one thing however enforcing them is another
part, perhaps the most important part. Have you or your association
taken this into consideration how you're going to enforce whatever
restrictions you impose?? On my lake, we have three or four
"Lake Comissioners". They are deputized by the town, (so I've been
told??) and take turns policing the lake. These folks are mostly
residents of the lake community. This would be almost OK except for
several points.
None of them are trained in marine law enforcement with the exception
of perhaps one and therefore don't deal with the public very well.
I actually witnessed one of them scream at an offender as though he/she
were a child, (speeding after dark).
Aside from flashing blue lights and hailers, these L.C.'s look like
ordinary people, i.e. no uniform or badge or even markings on their
boats that would make you feel as though an impending reprimand meant
anything.
Third of all and in my opinion most important...when the lake gets
really crowded, they seem to disappear and then as you mat have
guessed...all H*LL breaks loose.
Well, I feel better...let's see....maybe since we have a pseudo type
of enforcement perhaps we can limit the number of boats that put it??
Good Luck__mike
|
| 85.10 | not alone | STAR::KMCDONOUGH | | Mon Jul 25 1988 17:50 | 27 |
| We have also talked about this issue in the public access note.
As I mentioned there, I am the president of a lake association.
We have talked over several courses of action:
- limit horsepower. This gets the over-sized speeders off the lake.
BUT, it also gets most of the serious water skiers off the lake
too. If the lake is so small that people really shouldn't be skiing
on it, that's another story. It also gets people in large boats
who poke along enjoying the scenery. It's got too many minuses
for me.
- Limit access/parking. See note 32.* for that discussion
- Increase enforcement. I've heard from people from all over the
place in New England with the same problems that you are having.
Some have had the lake association hire a cop for 4-6 hours on
a Sat or Sunday to check registrations/equipment at the ramp before
they ever get on the lake. If the law enforcement officer has a
boat, that's even better because you can almost guarantee that some
of the people who live on the lake and don't need to use the ramp
are part of the problem.
Where I am, if the officer didn't have a uniform and an official
looking boat, (s)he would get chased off the lake for sport.
Kevin
|
| 85.11 | Enforce, don't ban | PALMER::PALMER | half a bubble off plumb | Tue Jul 26 1988 09:29 | 27 |
|
Bite the bullet and ban stinkpots all together. Who needs the
noise, water pollution and the wake :^) .
Seriously, I understand your problem. I boat out of Hyannis
and have been affected by the rise in popularity of the unmuffled
cigarette type boats. They use to come down the channel in excess
of 40 mph, spewing noise and smoke. Hyannis extended the no wake
zone in the channel to keep these bozos from running over someone.
Why can't these losers muffle their engines and take a couple of
power squadron courses?
Unfortunately once again the many will be penalized for the
actions of a few. Last weekend I saw a jet ski zipping in and out
of the channel dodging 30-40 ft boats and drinking a beer. There
has been a great increase in the popularity of smaller (18-25ft)
trailerable motor boats in the past five years and they are putting
a strain on the water system and on peoples nerves. An arbitrary
hp limit would be unfair unless the goal was to ban motor boats
and the limit was set at 15 hp.
I think the best method is to impose a use fee. The fee should
be used to hire a cop to check the ramp(s) and to enforce the rules
of the road. He should have the authority to hand out tickets and
throw jerks off of the lake. A person with a 20 grand boat isn't
going to complain about a $5 fee for putting in their boat. I would
be glad to pay a couple of bucks if it went to keeping the
irresponsible and just plain dangerous boater under control.
Ralph Palmer
|
| 85.12 | Me too, I try some dumb tricks. | MENTOR::REG | Just browsing; HONEST, I'm BROKE ! | Tue Jul 26 1988 09:58 | 19 |
|
I'll 'fess up to ONE irresponsible act (OK, I shoulda known
better, and I probably did, deep down).
We were returning from the islands in Quinsiggy with my son
skiing, we got to the Rte #9 bridge so I cut to wake speed, ASS_U_ME_ING
that I could just tow him through and 'hit it' on the other side.
(Me thinks I've seen this done.)
"Not so", said the officer, "You can't tow anything under that
bridge, wake speed or not." After a lot of hurried apologies he
just let me go with a warning, which I think sank in a lot more
than a ~$100 fine would have and it didn't cause any resentment either.
Reg
{I suspect that towing a disabled vessel through that bridge
IS allowed, though I wasn't about to argue the finer points with
him.}
|
| 85.13 | Are laws to limit behavior or make the job easier for the polic | CASV05::GUNNERSON | JLG | Wed Jul 27 1988 13:18 | 17 |
| If I've got it right laws/rules are behavior modifiers. Society
agrees that we've got to limit some behaviors in order to live together
in harmony. I.e., you can't do what you'd really like to do.
A law limiting everyone's behavior to the same norm is seen as fair
because everyone is treated equally - except Congress, of course,
which excludes itself from all the rules.
Now we talk about laws/rules that are written based on ease of
enforcement and convenience to the enforcers, which only secondarily
limits the behavior we are trying to change and not in an equal
and fair manner. If this mode of thinking continues we will find
ourselves in a police state sooner than later.
A quote comes to mind: "A job worth doing, is worth doing well."
john
|
| 85.14 | speed traps cost money | HPSCAD::WHITMAN | Acid rain burns my BASS | Thu Jul 28 1988 08:20 | 30 |
| re .13
< Now we talk about laws/rules that are written based on ease of
< enforcement and convenience to the enforcers, which only secondarily
< limits the behavior we are trying to change and not in an equal
< and fair manner...
John,
You make a very good point, however we (members of society) who wish to
have the laws enforced (presumably for good reason) need to decide how badly we
want the rules to be followed. If one assumes the users (residents and
otherwise) of a given body of water do not want idiots endangering their loved
ones by letting them (the idiots) race around the lake at 60+ mph, and those
same users are idealists (we need idealists), then they had better be prepared
to fork over sigificant bucks to keep a cop in the area all the time. I doubt
the police care how the law is written so long as they can do their job (get
convictions). It is, rather, are we the people prepared to pay for enforcement
of laws which take a lot of manpower and equipment to enforce? It is not the
convienience of the enforcers, but rather convienience of whoever is footing
the bill (taxpayer, organization, or individual).
There are three solutions:
1: no action, whoever has the 'baddest' boat wins
2: limit horsepower figuring small engines can't go too fast
3: PAY for enforcement of speed violators
Without question solution 3 is the RIGHT thing to do. I don't know if I'm
willing to pay the price for either solution 1 or solution 3.
|
| 85.15 | Launch fee = Money for patrol | BINKLY::SMITH | | Thu Jul 28 1988 10:57 | 17 |
|
If the number of non-resident boats is as high as you seem to be
implying, it would seem that a small launching fee ($5 - $10) would
considerably help in funding an officer on the lake.
Here in Marlboro, MA on Fort Meadow, I am told that we have two
local police officers who have boats and they "patrol" the lake
as well as the fact that the town has "deputised" a couple lake
commisioners. I must say that they do a fair job and usually you
really do not know they are there. They seem to give warnings
and take down numbers(looking for repeat offenders). Usually they
are there only on weekends from about noon to 6:00. I do not know
if they are paid and I have never seen a radar gun for speeding.
/Mike Smith
|
| 85.16 | Clear as mud | VICKI::DODIER | | Thu Jul 28 1988 17:17 | 42 |
| re: HP restriction
How do you tell the difference between someone with a 120 hp vs. a
160+ hp I/O motor at a glance ?
re: Jetskis
Jetskis do not hurt people, people hurt people. To say otherwise
is the same mentality which would ban/severely restrict handguns which
inevitably infringes on peoples freedoms. The big difference is
that there is not a big lobby (like the NRA) to protect the rights
of jetskiers.
re: Conversation in general
Sounds a lot like the Public Access note (as was already mentioned
in an earlier note). As I mentioned in that other note, if someone
buys a boat that can do 70 mph+, there should be some way to accommodate
these people that want to go fast. I don't find the "if you wanna
go that fast get into racing" attitude much more than a cop out.
This hopefully winds up being the consensus of many people as to what
the allowable top speed is and where/when it can be done. The criteria
for this is a mystery to me, especially with the national allowable
speed limit going from 55 to 65. Part of this is for the sake of
safety but the roads in N.H. that went from 55 to 65 MPH have not
necessarily been made any safer. As far as gas mileage, one of my
2 vehicles operates more efficiently at 65 then 55. Then there is of
course the autobaun where they eventually put a speed limit on (120
mph I heard). Yes, this is crystal clear to me.
Before imposing any new restrictions, it would probably be to
everyones advantage to know what existing laws are already on the
books. It may be that all the rules you need already exist. After
that, you still have the problem of enforcement. I'm sorry but I do
not want to have to pay to launch a boat to subsidize patrols. Once
any fee starts, it always goes up. Since the people that have
waterfront have there own docks/access, if they want to limit access
they simply raise the fee to some outrageous amount and can then say
"If you don't like it, go someplace else". Simply not acceptable.
RAYJ
|
| 85.17 | Vermont regulated waters per 10 VSA par 1424 | BTO::JPETERS | John Peters, DTN 266-4391 | Mon Aug 01 1988 11:12 | 78 |
| Adams Lake, Woodford, no internal combustion engines
Beebe Pond, Hubbardton, no waterskiing, HP <10, speed <5mph, no
houseboats on live aboard facilities
Black pond, Hubbardton, no internal combustion engines
Burr Pond, Sudbury, <5MPH between 6:00 PM and 10:00 AM
publicly launched boats for fishing only and
restricted to <5mph at all times no
houseboats on live aboard facilities
Echo Lake (Keeler Pond), Sudbury/Hubbardton, <5mph, no wake
Emerald Lake, East Dorset, no int. comb. engines
Fern Lake, Leicester, <5MPH, no aircraft
Glen Lake, Castleton/Benson, <5MPH, no houseboats
Grout Pond, Stratton, only electric motors, no houseboats,
non-polluting floats and docks
Half Moon Pond, Hubbardton, no int. comb. engines
Huff (Hough) Pond, Sudbury, no int. comb. engines
Lake Bomoseen, Castleton, water skiing and boats >5HP prohibited
within 100' of shoreline S of narrows
at Indian Point
Lake Dunmore, Salisbury/Leicester, no houseboats
Lake Hortonia, Hubbardton/Sudbury, >5mph or "as to cause a disturbing
wake" prohibited in bay or channel
between dam and main lake
Lake Paran, Bennington, no motors
Lake St. Catharine (Lily Pond and Little Pond), Wells/Poultney
no water skiing in Lily Pond or channel between
Lily Pond and Lake St, C., <5mph, same area.
Lake Shaftsbury, Shaftsbury, no int. comb. engines
Little Hosmer Pond, Craftsbury, no water skiing, <10HP, ,5MPH, no
houseboats
Long Pond, Greensboro, electric motors only
Mirror Lake, Calais, powerboats restricted to <5mph within two bay
areas s of Hall Point, powerboats <10mph
elsewhere, no houseboats
North Springfield Reservoir, Weathersfield/Springfield,
no water skiing, <5MPH
Perch Pond, Benson, electric only, no houseboats, non polluting
docks and floats
Silver Lake, Barnard, <5mph within 200' of swimmer, vessel, raft,
or shoreline, water skiing 4 boat limit from
10:00 AM and 6:00 PM, CCW only, maintain 100'
min clearance to swimmer, vessel, or raft
Spring Lake, Shrewsbury, no water skiing, only electric motors,
<5mph, no aircraft, non-polluting docks
and rafts, no houseboats
Stoughton Pond, Weathersfield, no water skiing, <5mph
Stratton Pond, Stratton, no motors, no docks, floats, or houseboats.
Sunset Lake, Benson, no water skiing between 6:00 PM and 10:00 AM,
only one skier per boat, <5mph within 200'
of swimmer, occupied canoe, rowboat, or other
light craft or within 200' of shoreline except
when starting or stopping skier, no houseboats,
non polluting docks and floats
Valley Lake, Woodbury, <10MPH within 100' of shoreline, <55HP, no
water skiing between 6:30 PM and 10:00 AM
or within 100' of shoreline, no houseboats
Woodward Reservoir, Plymouth, <5mph n of line from shore to shore
passing through southernmost point
of long narrow island on w side of
lake (Tucker's Island) and southernmost
point of long narrow peninsula on
e side of lake (Bear Pit Point),
elsewhere <5mph within 200' of any
shore or island, or between 6:00 PM
and 10:00 AM, only one boat skiing
at any time, no houseboats
Wrightsville Reservoir, Montpelier/Middlesex,
<2mph and not to cause a disturbing wake n'ly
of narrows immediately n of roadside park
boat launch ramp.
The complete text of the rules regulating the use of the public
waters listed above are available at the town clerk's office and
at the office of the Vermont Water Resources Board, 58 East State
Street, Montpelier, Vermont
802-828-2871
|
| 85.18 | Lakes you can ski on? | CIMNET::JACOBSEN | | Tue Aug 09 1988 16:03 | 31 |
| re: 85.16
Well put. I didn't want to open an entirely new subject but I'm glad
you mentioned the similarities. Also it seems speed isn't always
limited by the horsepower on a boat. I know of an 80 HP boat which
will do 45 mph. It takes a while to get going but once its moving
it goes faster than you'd expect for 80 HP.
re: 85.17
Thanks for the listing of regulations. I'm looking for a listing
(perhaps looking at the ones with regulations and working backwards
it the only way to do it) of lakes and ponds in the greater Boston
area and Southern NH that DO allow waterskiing and waterski boats.
I've been looking to buy a house on waterfront and keep running
into waterfront but no skiing allowed.
If anyone has suggestions or a list of lakes I should look for
housing on please let me know. I would like a dock for our boat
as well.
As for the lake regulations I would hate to buy a house and
a then find that next year I wouldn't be allowed to ski on the lake.
Talk about property value going down.
What is the best way to find out what is "in the wind" for lake
regulations?
Thanks, Marcelle
|
| 85.19 | Vermont legislative hearings | BTO::JPETERS | John Peters, DTN 266-4391 | Wed Aug 17 1988 09:59 | 16 |
| The special legislative summer committee on [Vermont] boating
laws has scheduled public hearings for Wednesday [17 August
1988?] in Burlington and North Hero.
Lt. Michael Vinton, head of the State Police marine division,
said the Burlington meeting will be at 7 p.m. in the conference
room on the upper level of the boathouse. In North Hero, the
committee will hear testimony at 10 a.m. at Tudhope Marine.
Vinton said the six committee members will meet early Wednesday
at the Burlington Coast Guard Station where they will board a
cruiser for a tour of many trouble spots on northern Lake
Champlain, including Burlington Harbor, Shelburne Bay, Alburg,
the drawbridge between North Hero and Grand Isle, and Malletts
Bay.
From the 16 August 1988 Burlington Free Press
|
| 85.20 | | MENTOR::REG | Just browsing; HONEST, I'm BROKE ! | Mon Aug 29 1988 13:21 | 3 |
| re .19 Any outcome to report ?
|
| 85.21 | You see so much in just one year!! | HPSTEK::BHOVEY | | Tue Aug 30 1988 09:31 | 59 |
|
I am a little late in reading this note but I would like to give
some input. This is my first year boating. I have been on Lake Shirley
in Lunenburg Mass most of the summer. My wifes father has a house
there and he has enjoyed the usage of the boat and the fun weve
had. I was only able to get into one 2 day safty course but with
that and some studying of the laws I feel I am becoming a safe boater.
I own a 17 foot Sunbird, Corsair with a V6, 175 hp I/O. The engine
HP would'nt matter in controlling speed, the guys with the 120s are
travelling much faster than I will out there. Its smarts not HP.
Lake Shirley is not big and traffic can get bad on a Sat and Sun
afternoon. In one summer I have seen some really stupid people.
A couple of good examples are the guy who bought his kids a small
(about 10 ft) two seater with an outboard. These kids are approx
10-12 years old and they are out on the lake alone skipping all
over the place. There are jet skis pulling water skiers and of course
they are looking at the skier not where there going. Many boats
pull skiers without a spotter. Seventeen footers with 8-10 people
on board are not uncommon. Where in a cove with an island across
from us. People come around the island at increadable speeds,
especially one group of pretty boys who threatened to rip my heart
out one day because they almost ran into me. There are two 21 foot
screamers that throw a rooster tail about 30 feet in the air and
race each other through the 20 foot wide channel. One bean head
comes out of his dock down from us and nails it when he leaves.
Last week a friend and I asked him to hold it down especially since
kids are in the water. His reasoning is that he has lost 8 props
this year because the water is low and he wants to plane out fast
so he dont hit bottom. Sunday my boat spent more time rocking up
and down against the dock so he wouldnt hit a prop. The one thing
that is tough is that not once this year has a patrol boat been
on the lake. There is supposed to be an association on the lake
but I dont know what they do. I would think once in a while they
would want to see some enforcement of laws. Overall it has been
fun and a good learning experience for my son whom I am trying to
teach the rules and courtesies of safe boating. Jet skiers get the
same treatment as dirt bikers. The 90% who are safe and respectfull
of others allways pay for the 10% who are idiots and obnoxious.
I did dirt bikes for a few years and I only relized now due to all
the accidents that are happening that the manufacturers should be
responsible enough to publish dangers. Same with selling small speed
boats and jet skis. They people selling these should publish or
distribute safty rules and laws should apply just like a boat. This
would help but the real responsibility lies with us the PARENTS.
It is up to us to bring up a generation of safe boaters and
recreational vehicle users, teaching respect for people and property.
Unfortunitly its not all children though there are plenty of adults
involved here who never grew up, at least we can help the kids.
I know a few people that buy their kids these toys just to get them
off their backs and spend no time educating the kids.
It's no wonder people want to close off all the land and lakes.
I hope to enjoy many years of safe boating and I'm sure I will if
people stick together and push for enforcement of boating laws.
If your ever on Lake Shirley look for the K'PORT PASSION.
Sorry for being so long winded but this is an issue that effects
all of us.
Bill
|
| 85.22 | Whalom too | COBRA::DUFFY | | Tue Aug 30 1988 12:53 | 8 |
| re: .21
Lake Whalom is sadly just as bad with regards to irresponsible
boat operators and some of the operators of the jet ski's have to
be certified lunatics. If I ever go on Shirley I will look for your
boat. If your on Whalom, look for "THE DINA". Happy boating. Also
if any of you boaters in the Fitchburg area would like a C.G.
Courtesy Marine Exam. I will be glad to accomodate.
|
| 85.23 | Leave me alone, I'm just skiing!! | BUFFER::GOLDSMITH | | Mon Jul 24 1989 16:41 | 42 |
| I hope I don't look too stupid answering all these year-old notes,
but I still haven't seen an answer yet on this subject.
This is an issue now on every lake, mine being no exception (Pine
River Pond, NH), and a feasible answer has to come up that is accepted
everywhere. I know you've seen all these people at your association
meeting:
"I dont like the noise" That's tough. You're going to have to put
up with it. There's a lot of people here now who are having just as
much fun as you, but there out in their loud boats or jet skis. There
has to be some noise restrictions, obviously, on some of the larger
cigarettes.
"The boats go too fast" That's where we need the restrictions. A
speed limit is the answer. It's great to be pulled out of the water
skiing behind a good 200 hp. Or cruising to your friends house with 10
people in the boat that need the extra power.
"The boats are too big" There should probably be some size
restrictions on some lakes, because a 30 foot boat on an acre pond is a
little big.
"They make huge wakes" That's another thing. I don't think
there's anything worse than when you get the Sunday cruisers out there who
get the nose out of the water as far as they can and plow through the
lake at 20 mph, sending out a 5 foot swell, breaking all of your mooring
lines and sending your boats up on to the dock. Stop it!
"There's too many boats" Unfortunately, there's nothing to do
about that. Everyone wants a boat, and you can't stop people from
buying them once they own a house.
"Those things are dangerous" Anything that you can pick out is no
more dangerous than a table fork which you could just as easily stick
down your throat and kill yourself as hit an island or a person on a
jet-ski. All the nit-picking that goes on everywhere is getting a
little old. And another thing, where do people get the ideas that
jet-skis are any more dangerous than a ski boat or a 5 hp fishing boat.
I don't know about you, but it would hurt just as much to get chopped
up by a 5 hp motor or hit in the head with a jet-ski. Those are just
risks which we take everyday, like when you drive your car to work.
In closing, I'm just saying (and I said alot) that in order to live
together with all of the other people on your lake, you just have to
make a line in the middle and live with it, before all of the lakes
require you to be 65 years old canoeing.
Peace and water skiing for everyone! (Behind a Nautique :-)
Steve
|
| 85.24 | Speed Limit Bill for NH Waters | SOLVIT::MALCOLM | | Mon Apr 22 1991 19:20 | 97 |
| I wanted to put a note here about a bill currently being considered
by a Transportation sub-committee of the N.H. House of Representatives.
The bill (Senate Bill) SB 193-FN is a bill relating to the restricting
of power boat speeds. I don't have time now to type the whole bill in,
but I will put in the amended analysis attached to the bill along with
some comments. Any volunteers?? I can fax you a copy Tuesday pm.
Amended Analysis
The bill establishes maximum absolute speeds for operating a
motorboat on the public water of the state for both daylight hours
and hours of darkness and exempts lakes greater than 3,400 acres.
Fines imposed for violations shall be comparable to those imposed
for excessive speed of a motor vehicle.
In addition, this bill gives the commissioner of the department of
safety the authority to adopt rules and establish procedures for public
hearings to ensure compliance with this section.
Some of the "high" points of this bill are:
In section 1, Par. I ,
There is a provision allowing the commissioner of safety
to "adopt rules under RSA 541-A governing the maximum horsepower of
boat engines and outboard motors or prescribe maximum speed limits for
the operation of such boats or outboard motors applicable to or upon
all or any portion of the public waters of this state."
Section 1, Par. II.
"The maximum speed during daylight hours on the public
waters of the state shall be no more than 45 miles per hour."
Section 1, Par. III
"The maximum speed between sunset and sunrise on the public
waters of the state shall shall be no more than 20 miles per hour.
Section 1, Par IV
lists exemptions which include approved races," water skiers,
and other exceptions that may be granted by governor and council in the
establishment of special speed zones with unlimited speed."
Section 1, Par. V has guidlines for fee (fine) setting.
Section 1, Par. VI (Attention Salt Water Boaters)
"The Department of safety, division of safety services is authorized to
enforce the provisions of this section in conjunction with the United
States Coast Guard. The United States Coast Guard shall have
enforcement powers only in the public coastal waters of the state."
Section 1, Par. VII
" Any lake which is greater than 3,400 acres shall be exempt from the
provisions of paragraphs II and III".
Section 2 of the bill talks about a hearing process by which 100 or
more residents of a town in which a lake is located can petition to
have the lake speed limits imposed.
End of bill
------------------------------------------------------------------
I have some of the forms used when attending a hearing in Concord. This
form (card) lists the bill #, name, business address, phone #, whether
you wish to speak, and most importantly two sections:
Supporting Bill__________________ Opposing Bill__________________
I can send some of these out if anyone wants to fill them out. I will
check to see if I can fill them out if I receive a note or mail message
with the information. I am located in MKO1 right now, and will be in
DAS and NIO tomorrow morning (Tuesday). The official hearing was last
week, but these cards can still be turned in. There are some executive
sessions on the 24-25 ? of april.
I also have some Addresses and names of relevant members of the sub-
committee handling this bill. If anyone wants to send letters besides
the hearing cards, this would be effective.
The legislative FAX # is 603-271-2361 (mark it urgent)
The names are: Rep. Roger Stewart, Chair
Rep. H. Nelson
Rep. R. Turgeon
The fastest address is
Name
Transportation Committee
Room 203
Legislative Office Bldg.
Concord, N.H. 03301
In case anyone is wondering, I am VERY much against this bill.
I'm sure this note will spawn some interesting conversations. :^)
Scott
|
| 85.25 | Please send data | GEMVAX::HICKSCOURANT | | Tue Apr 23 1991 00:38 | 7 |
| Please fax a copy of the bill and assorted information to
John Hicks-Courant
(508) 667-5636 (fax #)
Thanks.
John H-C
|
| 85.26 | Who skis faster than 45? | KAHALA::SUTER | We dun't need no stinkin' skis! | Tue Apr 23 1991 10:52 | 22 |
|
re: Scott,
Thanks for the info....
The only thing that really appears different is the fact that
the state can create HP/speed limits. Didn't HP restrictions only
come from petitions before?
For the speed guys, 45 MPH will stink, but with the exemptions
listed it looks like all you have to do is tow a skier! :-)
Speed limits do and don't bother me. They don't bother me because
a Nautique can't break 45 anyway, but they certainly do bother me
because they are another example of legislating boating to death.
And as most tournament ski boat owners are fearful of.... first
comes speed limits, then HP restrictions.... "But really occifer,
that 351 PCM is only 70 HP!"
I'll post my fax # tomorrow.....
Rick
|
| 85.27 | I'm writing a letter to my rep... | NRADM::WILSON | On the boat again... | Tue Apr 23 1991 11:55 | 31 |
|
I think the speed limit is a bad idea too, especially by setting it
so low. Does anyone know which lakes are excluded from the speed limit
by the 3400 acre limit? I think it would be ridiculous if you could
get a ticket for doing 50 mph in the middle of the broads on Lake
Winnipesaukee. The Marine Patrol is already highly visible, and some
of the younger officers are a bit underpaid and overzealous (to put
it mildly), worrying about getting a ticket for doing 48 in a 45 zone
is the last thing we need.
What bothers me the most is that these restrictions are initiated
by small groups of activists who push for their cause, but are not
necessarily in the majority. It's easy to find enough people to
sign a petition for almost anything, while the majority who are
opposed are generally not organized enough or aren't even aware of
what's happening in time to do anything about it.
Initiating a speed limit is like a new tax. Getting it passed is
the hardest part. Once it's in place, it's a piece of cake for a
special interest group to get the tax raised or the speed limit
lowered even further. If this passes, there's nothing to prevent
the speed limit from being lowered to 40 or 35 next year. Look at
the Mass. income tax as a perfect example.
This is a sad state of affairs, that while Eastern European countries
are slowly gaining their freedom, we sit by and watch our's being taken
away bit by bit, without even realizing it.
Off my soapbox...
Rick
|
| 85.28 | where's the DUKE now? | PENUTS::GORDON | | Tue Apr 23 1991 13:09 | 11 |
| Sounds like you NH guys have the DUKE as a how to raise $$ consultant.
It sure sounds like one of his tricks. From what I hear, Mass may be
the place to live in the future the way NH keeps raising fees etc.
Time for a tea party, Just have everyone stay off the lakes on some
weekend, like memorial day or July 4, and see what happens ; the
legislature will be begging you to come back. ;^)
Gordon
|
| 85.29 | More info on speed bill | SOLVIT::MALCOLM | | Tue Apr 23 1991 13:49 | 16 |
| I have some additional info. I can fill out the hearing cards for
anyone who wishes. I will also fax a copy out with the bill. The first
batch of cards goes to Concord tomorrow am. I will be out of my office
until 4. After that, the faxes will be sent out.
to get your name on a card, send mail or enter a note with:
Name, home or business address, and whether you are for or against the
bill.
I will post the results as I hear from concord.
Scott
|
| 85.31 | My license plate still says "Live free or die" | NRADM::WILSON | On the boat again... | Wed Apr 24 1991 17:07 | 22 |
| RE: Note 85.30 by GEMVAX::HICKSCOURANT
>> Just stay away for the whole summer if your boat travels faster than
>> 35 mph, and you can't keep yourself from opening up the throttle.
>> Please?
I've been trying to figure out a way to respond to this attitude and
still retain my moderator privileges. 8^)
Let's just say that this IS the powerboats conference John, and you
probably won't find much support here for a 35mph speed limit. If I
got this right, we shouldn't ski on the river, we shouldn't ski near
your house on the lake, and now if we want to go over *35* (!) on Lake
Winnipesaukee we should just stay away for the whole summer?
I'm curious as to how you can justify imposing your own restrictive rules
on everyone else, and if we don't agree we should "just stay away". Could
you explain? Your efforts to preserve the lake are appreciated, but I think
there's got to be a better balance between preserving the lake and preserving
people's rights than the one you seem to support.
Rick
|
| 85.33 | More Speed bill info... | SOLVIT::MALCOLM | | Thu Apr 25 1991 09:20 | 34 |
| I have a couple of updates regarding the speed bill.
There were several ammendments proposed yesterday.
Par II changes to call for a max daylight speed between July 1 and the
day after Labor day of no more than 55 MPH.
Par III changes to call for a maximum speed of no more than 20 MPH or
@ mnimum planing speed.
Par V Fines for Par 2 + 3 shall be equal to , in $$$$$, the MPH @ which
the boat is traveling.
The effective date for implementation, if passed, is July 1, 1992.
I have heard that the subcommittee is leaning towards the bill.
One member, Roland M Turgeon (d)
609 Rimmon St.
Manchester, NH 03102 (603-622-9217)
apparently has no "axe" to grind, and therefor may be persuaded by the
actual public sentiment. Anybody within his district is urged to call.
More updates as they come up. There were 2 more things on the bill that
were supposed to be taken out. Since they weren't on the amendment
sheet that I saw I won't put them in yet. I am having it checked on
today and will put them here later today if necessary.
Scott
|
| 85.34 | No speed limit on 5 largest NH lakes | STAR::BOIKO | VMS - Very Much Single | Fri Apr 26 1991 17:47 | 8 |
| As it stands right now...this bill does not effect the speed limit on
any of the 5 largest lakes in the state. Since I've been spending my
summers (since 87) on Sunapee, and since it's just over 4800
acres...this bill does not effect me or my Baja. :-) But it does effect
many other smaller lakes, and this is what the Marina lobby group is
currently attempting to over-turn.
-mike-
|
| 85.35 | Everyone is now effected :^( | SOLVIT::MALCOLM | | Mon Apr 29 1991 09:53 | 14 |
| I'm afraid I have another update (and bad news to those who thought
they were going to be exempted).
Two other provisions of the bill that were changed as of last Thursday
(4-25-91).
They are
1) that 100 people can no longer petition to have a speed limit
imposed on a lake that didn't have one.
2) ALL lakes are now going to be subject to the speed restrictions.
Lakes over 3400 acres are not going to be exempt.
Scott
|
| 85.36 | I don't like it... | NRADM::WILSON | On the boat again... | Mon Apr 29 1991 11:15 | 6 |
| RE: .35
Does this mean that the speed limit passed? If not, what is
the status, are they still conducting hearings?
Rick
|
| 85.37 | I don't like it either! | SOLVIT::MALCOLM | | Mon Apr 29 1991 13:44 | 4 |
| No, the bill hasn't passed **yet**. It is still in committee, and
doesn't have to come out of committee until May 7 at the latest.
Scott
|
| 85.38 | Sounds good to me... | TOOK::SWIST | Jim Swist LKG2-2/T2 DTN 226-7102 | Mon Apr 29 1991 15:12 | 4 |
| Why would anyone want or need to go >55 mph or a *lake* ?
I thought boating was for relaxation, but at those speeds....
|
| 85.39 | Different strokes for different folks... | HPSTEK::BCRONIN | | Mon Apr 29 1991 15:49 | 15 |
| RE: .38
I know people who say "Why would anyone want to get in a boat?"
You pick a sport and someone will ask "Why?"
Some people boat for relaxation, some for the thrill of the speed,
some only to get to where the fish are.
No, my boat can't go 55... Would I like to go 55..65..75 in a boat?
You BET!!!...... In the right place, at the right time. Some lakes
are plenty big enough for over 55..... My 2 cents.
B.C.
|
| 85.40 | Speed bill tentatively "under study" till next year | SOLVIT::MALCOLM | | Wed May 01 1991 13:57 | 8 |
| The latest update is that the Speed Bill was addressed yesterday in
the transportation committee. The result is that the bill has been
"re-referred" until next year. The effect of this is that it becomes
an issue under study. If the Senate goes along with this, the bill will
be dead until next year.
Scott
|
| 85.41 | S.C. Boating | RAVEN1::B_ADAMS | Get your stripes here! | Tue Aug 27 1991 23:56 | 16 |
| For you guys who would love to come down to the sunny South for some
great fishing and skiing, here are a few rules from the Wildlife Corp.
Boat regs' cost $16 and are payable every 4 years.
Lakes Hartwell, Keowee, Russell and Jocassee are not subjected to
the new Coast Guard Tax. Only a few lower state lakes are affected.
You may have Beer and Wine aboard your vessel, but no liquor!
The BUI that you may get is up to the officer flaging you down.
That's all for now...hopefully this will get you started.
B.A.
|