Wanning lawmaker support for boat speed limit obvious

Enforcement was the theme Tuesday when Earl Sweeney, Assistant Commissioner of the Department of Safety, and Dave Barrett, Director of the Division of Safety Services, which includes the Marine Patrol, appeared before the House Resources, Recreation and Development Committee, which is mulling over a bill (House Bill 162) to impose speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee. Afterwards, one member of the committee said he sensed lawmaker support for the measure was waning.

Sponsored by Representative Jim Pilliod (R-Belmont), HB 162 would set a daytime speed limit of 45 miles per hour and a nighttime speed limit of 25 miles per hour on the lake, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABS), formed in May to marshal support for the bill, leads a coalition of lake associations, environmental groups, business interests and property owners in support of the bill ranged against forces led by the New Hampshire Marine Trades Association and New Hampshire Recreational Boaters Association in opposition.

After three public meetings around the lake this summer, a majority of the committee members appear to agree, as Jim Bianco, a lobbyist representing opponents of the bill, put it that something should be done about the increased boat traffic on the lakes, but "the question is what is something." Earlier this month, at its first work session, the committee discussed a variety of approaches, among them applying a "reasonable and prudent" standard, either alongside or in place of specific speed limits.

Sweeney told the committee that on the highway, a "reasonable and prudent" standard worked in tandem with posted speed limits. The statute (RSA265:60), he explained, reads that "no person shall drive a vehicle ... at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing," or, he added, "so that the vehicle is under control at all times." At the same time, all roads have posted speed limits. Speeds exceeding these limits, the law describes as "prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable and prudent and that it is unlawful."

Sweeney stressed that depending on the circumstances, a court could find a driver traveling below the posted limit in violation because, given poor conditions, it was not a "reasonable and prudent" speed and likewise, find a driver exceeding the posted limit not in violation because, given ideal conditions, it was a "reasonable and prudent" speed. "It cuts both ways," Sweeney said.

In response to a question, Sweeney explained that the Legislature sets the parameters for speed limits, but the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (DOT) posts the specific limits on particular stretches of roads. He said that engineers measure the speed of traffic and post a limit that most closely matches the speed of 85 percent of motorists. Without offering a means of setting a posted speed limit on water, Sweeney pointed out that the distance a boat would travel in a second could be calculated by multiplying the rate of speed, measured in miles per hour, by 1.5. "A boat going 90 miles per hour would travel 135 feet in a second," he said, volunteering that "I think that is too fast."

Representative Christopher Ahlgren (R-Wolfeboro) asked about combining the so-called safe passage law, which requires boaters to maintain headway speed within 150 feet of other vessels, with a speed limit. He suggested a "tiered relationship between speed and distance," so that the greater the distance between vessels, the higher the speed they could travel. Sweeney replied that such a law would be difficult to enforce since officers would be required to measure both speed and distance and prove each beyond a reasonable doubt in court. "My job is to make sure whatever you do is enforceable," Sweeney reminded the committee.

Barrett, who has not hidden his misgivings about the bill, refused to be drawn into the debate, but said nothing to suggest that he considered speed limits either desirable or necessary. He told that the committee that in his 13 years as director he was "constantly reminded that we need to be conscious that we are a tourist state," a consideration that led him to prefer "compliance through education rather than intimidation."

Although he earlier belittled the effectiveness of radar on water, he conceded that "yeah, it'll work, but that's a qualified it'll work. It's not going to do the kind of enforcement you're going to get on the road. It's not going to yield big results."

In 2004, Barrett said that Marine Patrol issued 1793 summonses, estimating that as many as 40 percent of them were for violating the safe passage rule. He estimated that less than five summonses were issued for reckless operation. Barrett noted that although the number of boat registrations has risen, the number of accidents has fallen, stressing that there has not been an accident caused by speed during the past five years. "Statistically you can't demonstrate a need for speed limits," he said.

Representative Dennis Abbott (D-Newmarket) questioned the importance Barrett attached to statistics, saying that the public's concern for safety on the lakes was no less valid for having "nothing to do with statistics." "I'm sure that's true," Barrett answered, adding that the growing number of boats was an issue. " Sooner or later we're all going to be dealing with how much is too much," he said. However, he insisted that imposing speed limits would not ease the problems on the lake. "A speed limit will not enable the person on Pendleton Beach to return to canoeing," Barrett said.

That prompted Representative Chris Irish (R-Claremont) to interrupt. "There is a safety issue, but this isn't going to cure it. We're trying to create a problem to justify this legislation."

Steve Griffin, a lobbyist who represents WinnFABS, disagreed. He argues that speed limits, by slowing down the fastest boats, would effectively enlarge the space on the lake open to other types of watercraft. Jared Teutsch of the New Hampshire Lakes Association stressed that although safety is a paramount consideration, there is also a question of fairness. Taking exception to those who discount HB 162 as "feel good Legislation," he declared "of course, it is feel good legislation" and asked "what is wrong with that? Speed limits would make people feel more safe and secure on the lakes."

Abbott pointed to the statute governing navigation, especially its declaration of policy (RSA 270:1), which reads in part "in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses."

Supporters of HB 162 have been long been disappointed by the lack of support from law enforcement in general and Barrett in particular. "Director Barrett poisoned this issue from the beginning when he said that the bill was unenforceable," Abbott said. "That was an extremely corrosive remark." Nor was he encouraged by Barrett's performance on Tuesday. "We lost ground," he said, adding that an amendment to replace the specific speed limits in the bill with a "reasonable and prudent standard," offered by representative Chris Christensen (R-Merrimack), reflected waning support in the committee for HB 162 as written.

Meanwhile, Representative Nancy Johnson (D-Milton) has filed a bill to set speed limits on remote controlled model boats. She explained that she filed the bill on behalf of a constituent who lives on a lake in a "no wake zone." When a hobbyist lost control of his remote controlled boat, it careened over her lawn, destroying some property and narrowly missing her dogs. An officer from Marine Patrol said the agency could do nothing in the absence of laws governing the speed of model boats. "It does seem reasonable that if a boat must obey a speed limit in a no wake area, a remote control boat that is capable of doing some serious damage if it hits something or someone, should also obey the speed limit in a no wake area," Johnson said.