(Logan Martin Lake Specific)
4,319 messages
Updated 7/5/2024 7:54:28 AM
Lakes Online Forum
83,915 messages
Updated 9/7/2024 7:52:09 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,200 messages
Updated 8/23/2024 12:20:47 PM
(Logan Martin Lake Specific)
126 messages
Updated 12/23/2022 9:21:15 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,171 messages
Updated 6/27/2024 7:05:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
Name: |
Pontoonfisher
-
|
|
Subject: |
Boat ban is BS
|
Date:
|
4/27/2008 11:25:12 AM
|
Maybe we should start limiting the size of the homes that can be built on Lake Martin. Outlaw the use of pesticides and fertilizers around the lake. And while we are at it let's make all the counties around the lake dry. The noise pollution issue is a crappy reason for banning large boats. You can buy a small boat that is just as load as a 42' Cigarrette. The pollution issue is bogus too. Do people really know how many old septic tank systems are leaching into the lake? The lake is going to get more crowded either way. It does not mater about the size of the boats.
|
Name: |
4thelake
-
|
|
Subject: |
Boat ban is BS
|
Date:
|
4/27/2008 12:44:48 PM
|
You are so correct. The issue is the way this law hit the books, and the limited thought that went behind it. I own one of the large boats under 30'6" and under 60mph. On the way to the rock this Saturday I had to slow to cross a wake of a 29' cruiser plowing down the lake at non planing speed. There were also 3 kids on the bow of this boat drinking beer while they were under way. Point? You cant legislate stupidity, and stupid legislation is not the answer. The state budget is in the red and this new law tasks the 4 or so busy Marine Police with shortly having to enforce this with limited man power. I want to see the Marine cruisers watching for the for mentioned act, than be out with a tape measure to see that the boat that I operate in a safe manor is legal or not. Every weekend I see idiots acting like they are the only people on the lake. We all need to stop being so passive when dealing with these people. Don't ask me how to do it but maybe this string can help with some good suggestions. Please refrain from bashing on this one and provide some useful solutions.
|
Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
Subject: |
Boat ban is BS
|
Date:
|
4/27/2008 1:11:13 PM
|
I for one think that it is way to cheap to register watercraft in this state. I wouldn't be oposed to added fees on the registration to go directly toward Marine Police to ENFORCE current laws and regulations. I think a little enforcement of some of the laws that already exist in regards to wake, unsafe operation, etc. etc. will go a long way. Even if they are just 'educational' stops where discourteous behavior is pointed out and alternatives explained i.e.; planing as opposed to plowing.
|
Name: |
Pontoon
-
|
|
Subject: |
sounds like Boob
|
Date:
|
4/27/2008 7:20:17 PM
|
inbred idiot
|
Name: |
ALSCN
-
|
|
Subject: |
LTL..
|
Date:
|
4/28/2008 12:09:28 PM
|
Actually LTL, I am not sure if you have registered your boat this year yet or not, but our registration tripled from last year. Not too say I am complaining, because it was still less then registering either of our vehichles.
|
Obviuosly I haven't registered one this year yet. I agree that the Marine Police will probably never see any of it. It is about time they went up, they have been to cheap for to long. I have never really understood why car tags are based on value and boat tags are based on length. An aluminium jon boat and 30K bass boat can pay the same tag fee never really seemed right to me.
|
Our boat, 33 ft was $75.00 Our other boat, 23 ft was $25.00
|
So it was only the 'big boat' that went up a lot then? If I remember it was like 20 ft and under was $16, 21-?? ft was 20 something. I cant remember it has been so long since I had to buy one for anything but an 18ft. but it has been $16 forever.
|
Keep in mind, (of course) this is a State-wide charge. Not specific to Lake Martin...
|
And where is the increase in revenues going? Inquiring minds want to know.....lol.
|
Name: |
Pier Pressure
-
|
|
Subject: |
Boat ban is BS
|
Date:
|
4/28/2008 5:42:45 PM
|
(b) All registration money, except the two dollar ($2) fee allowed as aforesaid, shall be remitted monthly to the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources not later than 10 days after the first of each month. The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources shall transmit all money received by it to the State Treasurer, there to be deposited in a fund to be known as the "State Water Safety Fund."
(c) All moneys received out of the sale of licenses under the provisions of this article may be used by the Commissioner of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources for all purposes reasonably necessary in the cost of administration of this article, including the printing of certificates of registration, postage and transportation charges, clerical, personnel, equipment purchases, salaries, and other expenses for each year; except, that no funds collected under the provisions of this article may be used to supplement or pay the salaries of any enforcement officers other than those hired specifically for the purposes of administering the provisions of this article. The Commissioner of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources shall expend such moneys as may be appropriated to the Marine Police Division, in such manner as the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources may deem necessary and appropriate; provided, however, that such appropriations may be expended only for the purposes designated by the Legislature and in the amounts provided therefor in the general appropriation bill and shall be budgeted and allotted in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of Chapter 4 of Title 41. It is the intent of the Legislature that the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources utilize existing personnel and equipment of that department and of the sheriffs of this state to the maximum possible extent in enforcing and administering this article, to the end that there be no costly duplication of services.
|
|
|