Lake safety is just one of the reason to be opposed to SB-27

To the editor,

In response to the letter from Bob Flannery, political director of SBONH, regarding speed and safety on Lake Winnipesaukee, I wanted to note that few of the people who showed up in Concord to testify against SB-27 are retired people. I take exception to his statement that "all these people have nothing but time on their hands," and his earlier statement after the Senate hearing on SB-27 that those testifying against SB 27 were "a bunch of old fossils with nothing better to do."

I, for example, work full-time, as does my husband and daughter, and we are not "old." Along with many other N.H. people, all three of us took the time to come to Concord to be heard on this issue. Business people as well came to testify how SB-27 is bad for the Lakes Region tourism and economy.

A man who delivers propane to the islands took the time to testify against SB-27. A representative from the Loon Preservation Society testified that SB-27 endangers fledgling loon chicks. Camp directors took the time to explain that with the 45/30 MPH law more and more campers are venturing out and enjoying the lake. I suspect that of the 73 out of 80 people who signed in against SB-27 last month, most were not retired — they wanted their voice to be heard.

Safety is just one of the issues as to why to oppose SB-27. As noted above, other reasons include economics, tourism, preservation of the lake's natural resources, as well as maintaining a peaceful and meaningful lake experience for all. Add these reasons to the fact that the current 45/30 law is working well according to most N.H. people, and that says it all.

Gail Adams

Tuftonboro