Erosion Concerns

[windy1]

As an owner of a lakehouse, I would argue that it isn't the erosion that is the issue, its the damage done to our docks from the monster wakes that are put out mostly while surfing. All of the docks on our lake are floating docks and these huge wakes really bash them around pretty good. I don't want to spend $25k on a dock and lift and have to keep making repairs because someone wants to surf 40 feet from my dock. I'm lucky in that our house is near the end of the cove so I dont have as much of a problem as my neighbors who live closer to the main channel of the lake. Bottom line is that you are responsible for your wake and any damage it causes to someone elses boat or dock. On our lake, there is plenty of shoreline with no homes and people could surf in that part of the lake without upsetting anyone.

As far as loud stereos, I don't care as long as the profanity is kept to a reasonable level.

Nailed it. "you are responsible for your wake" my comments above are related to most Oklahoma lakes that are big and have vary few docks. I would not ride close to shore if it had dock after dock.

Does sound wake count.

Edited October 19, 2012 by windy1

[Bradley Thornton]

A Property owner objecting to having his/her investment washed away is not necessarily a liberal. My point is not a liberal vs. conservative slam, its that when high investment property owners team up with a pro active local government, you can expect "quality of life regulations." This is made even more interesting when you look at the houses on Town Lake and you see several high end boats in the boat house of each property that is "threatened" with erosion by wake sports.

OK, I just want this to be know I'm joking. Just a little I have never or will I ever judge a person not my place.

Yeah, there are waaaay too many over the top stereos on any given lake/river on a given day. It's annoying. Personally, I don't know why people have these. I'm constantly turning mine down and all I have is the bare bones. I sympathize with the home owners if it's a noise issue. In fact, a lot of the surveys listed 'loud music' as one of their concerns. BUT....if they are truly concerned with noise.... create a freaking noise ordinance for Pete's sake! Shutting down a public waterway to part of the public because of land owners is not the answer. Again, these are public waterways.

If the land owners in the area believe the property they've purchased (again...... on a flipping river that reaches flood stage every 5-10 years) is so unstable it cannot handle these wakes.....and they can prove it, then make a 'no wake zone' where no boats are allowed to recreate. As it stands now, the law is an obvious example of rich people using their money to take over a piece of PUBLIC water. It's sickening and sad this can actually happen.

There seems to be a common theme here; "on our lake". These are PUBLIC waterways that you've bought land on. The house is yours. The water belongs to the public. Your dock is floating on public property. In other words ,I have little sympathy for a guy who buys a house on a busy road, and then complains about traffic (and starts trying to parse & legislate what traffic HE deems acceptable traffic). Look at it this way: Most people who bought a house on the water, bought it because they love being near/on the water. At the same time, the wakeboarders/surfers/fisherman/skiiers that are on the lake are there for the exact same reason. Maybe the boaters on the water don't like the fact that "their" once peaceful, serene lake now has houses littering the shoreline. Maybe the fisherman doesn't like the skiier, and the skiier doesn't like the wakeboarder, and the wakeboarder doesn't like the surfer, and the surfer doesn't like the tuber, and the tuber doesn't like the jetskiier. It doesn't matter! These are public resources and owning land near them does not give you the moral high-ground to legislate against others. Plus, keep in mind, there is always someone with a bigger wake and a smaller wake than yours. Be careful who you choose to fight to take the water from........ because there's someone right behind you that wants to do the same thing to you.

Now don't get me wrong... I, and everyone else, understand there is no excuse for surfing 40' off the shoreline on a large lake OR blasting profane music near shore OR being a drunk ahole on the water, etc, etc, etc . Nobody here likes or sympathizes with these folks.....trust me. That's not what we're talking about here though: We're talking about 'erosion concerns' caused from boat wakes.........and last time I checked all power boats create them. Like I said before, one season of high water and/or increased flow does more erosion and shoreline reshaping than 10 lifetimes of boat wakes combined.

Just my 2 cents.

All this is spot on. Guess what if you live on a golf corse people will be playing golf next to your house. If you live on the water people are going to play music loud, wakeboard, ski, tube, you get the point. If you don't like it don't bye a house on a public lake go and bye you 20,000 acres and build you a lake. The fact of the matter is government needs to quit trying to make everyone happy and people need to be responsible for there own actions. You have a dock on a public lake take responsibility for the fact that you knew people were going to come bye with big wakes. I'm not saying they should morally but it is their american right. We are slowly losing all the rights we have do to trying to make everyone happy I'm sorry this task is impossible you give me 314,610,446 and counting people and I can say the nicest thing I can think of to all them and someones not going to like it. In case I am missing the point and it is the erosion seas have been crashing wave on the shore for a few years now, Rivers have been flowing for a few years now, Lake have been rising and falling for a few years now. The people that buy houses on them well it may be a good idea to learn to be responsible for your actions. I plan on buying lake front property in the next year so I am talking to myself too.

[Sixball]

The problem with this attitude is it does nothing to save the lake and property around it. I bought my place before we had wake boats. We had a low bridge that stopped larger boats from coming to this side. I had a sandy beach now gone wakes have washed the sand into deep water. My boat lift gets moved from wakes smashing into the boat. I raise my boat so its well out of the water. I can not leave the boat uncovered the wake splash fills it up with water. I could go on but I do know its a public lake.

I do spend many hours working to keep this lake in good shape for all to enjoy. We started a weed control program on the lake. Lake front owners pay for it in a special millage it runs about $80,000.00 for each of the last 4 years. This took years to get in place as it takes 51% of lake front owners to say yes. If you say nothing you were a no vote. I don't think lake front owners are being unreasonable just asking people to use some good judgment.

As I have said wake boarders and surfers are not the big problem. What you must be aware of is if you stand out you will become the problem!

[Bozboat]

OK, I just want this to be know I'm joking. Just a little I have never or will I ever judge a person not my place.

I was not worried about you, we're good.

[wakebrdr94]

There seems to be a common theme here; "on our lake". These are PUBLIC waterways that you've bought land on. The house is yours. The water belongs to the public. Your dock is floating on public property. In other words ,I have little sympathy for a guy who buys a house on a busy road, and then complains about traffic (and starts trying to parse & legislate what traffic HE deems acceptable traffic). Look at it this way: Most people who bought a house on the water, bought it because they love being near/on the water. At the same time, the wakeboarders/surfers/fisherman/skiiers that are on the lake are there for the exact same reason. Maybe the boaters on the water don't like the fact that "their" once peaceful, serene lake now has houses littering the shoreline. Maybe the fisherman doesn't like the skiier, and the skiier doesn't like the wakeboarder, and the wakeboarder doesn't like the surfer, and the surfer doesn't like the tuber, and the tuber doesn't like the jetskiier. It doesn't matter! These are public resources and owning land near them does not give you the moral high-ground to legislate against others. Plus, keep in mind, there is always someone with a bigger wake and a smaller wake than yours. Be careful who you choose to fight to take the water from........ because there's someone right behind you that wants to do the same thing to you.

Now don't get me wrong... I, and everyone else, understand there is no excuse for surfing 40' off the shoreline on a large lake OR blasting profane music near shore OR being a drunk ahole on the water, etc, etc, etc . Nobody here likes or sympathizes with these folks.....trust me. That's not what we're talking about here though: We're talking about 'erosion concerns' caused from boat wakes.........and last time I checked all power boats create them. Like I said before, one season of high water and/or increased flow does more erosion and shoreline reshaping than 10 lifetimes of boat wakes combined.

Just my 2 cents.

We may be talking erosion, but some of your comments have sparked my own questions. I own a place in the Parker Keys, always dreamed of it, a few years ago became a reality. When we use to cruise through there, never blasted my music as I knew people lived there and sound really travels through the canals. The a hole that comes through at 2am with the loudest stereo and engine partying through there, what about him? Turns out our property line goes half way into the canal, which means your neighbors property is the other half, making all the canals private property. Sure there is a public river just around the bend, but can I take a paint ball gun to him for trespassing? to put it into perspective, it would be like me driving infront of your house and blasting my stereo as loud as I want. I don't know about your lake or area, but I know plenty of smaller lakes here where owners are paying taxes and fees to live there and help keep the place maintained. They should get a vote.

[Bill_AirJunky]

There seems to be a common theme here; "on our lake". These are PUBLIC waterways that you've bought land on. ............snip.............Just my 2 cents.

So your cool with some twit blaring whatever loud garbage in front of your home? Isn't it basically the same thing?

We may be talking erosion, but some of your comments have sparked my own questions. I own a place in the Parker Keys,.............snip.........

Geez, I never even though about it in those canals. It must be absolutely nuts on any given Friday night in the summer.

I don't think it has to do with your "rights" to do as you please. It has to do with common courtesy to your fellow man.

[wdr]

I am feeling for the lake owners especially when I consider the amount of time and money I put into maintaining my land property, its got to require even more work for waterfront property even under the best of circumstances. I am sure most property owners understand and expect that there are going to be waves made, however they shouldn't have to worry about their boats ending up on the dock instead of tied to it anymore than I should have to worry about my kid getting run over in front of my house by someone speeding.

On the other hand I have witnessed first hand the near violent effrontery of land owners and their perceived god given right to regulate the water. IMO, the stupid boaters including: go fasters, lake lice, boarders, surfers, tubers the lowly slalom and footer types and I almost forgot about the foilers will ruin it for all boaters when the property owners and/or the law, "cuts that baby in half" to fix the problem!

3 words, No Wake Zone and getting the law to enforce the existing "you are responsible for the damage your wake creates" laws already on the books before they enact some b.s. Draconain laws and we all become 1% ers. (biker outlaw slang)

[Lance B. Johnson]

As an owner of a lakehouse, I would argue that it isn't the erosion that is the issue, its the damage done to our docks from the monster wakes that are put out mostly while surfing. All of the docks on our lake are floating docks and these huge wakes really bash them around pretty good. I don't want to spend $25k on a dock and lift and have to keep making repairs because someone wants to surf 40 feet from my dock. I'm lucky in that our house is near the end of the cove so I dont have as much of a problem as my neighbors who live closer to the main channel of the lake. Bottom line is that you are responsible for your wake and any damage it causes to someone elses boat or dock. On our lake, there is plenty of shoreline with no homes and people could surf in that part of the lake without upsetting anyone.

As far as loud stereos, I don't care as long as the profanity is kept to a reasonable level.

Are you sure it's surfing????? Where our cabin is the tubers outnumber surfers 20-1. Easily. REALLY I'm not exaggerating when I say all of the damage to our dock comes from tubers/ cruisers. Now if you come back and tell me that surfers outnumber tubers/ cruisers on your lake?....... I think you had better just think about that a bit and be honest with yourself.

Oh ya and our property is just like your neighbors. We are at the mouth of the cove so we take the brunt of every cruiser that plows by cutting the corner. I could hang out on the dock all day and never see a surfer. And further our dock was built in the 80s and still is holding fine in spite of all this traffic. i believe the damage in almost all cases is over exaggerated.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Ruffdog

[wakebrdr94]

@bill,

Yeah, the keys can get bad. When I bought the place, the neighbors first question was "are you going to rent the place?". Not even exaggerating. Fortunately for me, there in only one rental really close to me, but at $500 a night, usually only get a couple family's that split the place.

@ruff

I think one HUGE weighted surf wake will do a lot more damage to a boat and dock vs tubers and borders at 20mph. It's kind of like a building being built to withstand a 5.0 earthquake, and keeps taking 10s.

Let's just agree all Mastercraft owners need to keep their stereos low and stop surfing so close

[CliffB]

There seems to be a common theme here; "on our lake". These are PUBLIC waterways that you've bought land on. The house is yours. The water belongs to the public. Your dock is floating on public property. In other words ,I have little sympathy for a guy who buys a house on a busy road, and then complains about traffic (and starts trying to parse & legislate what traffic HE deems acceptable traffic). Look at it this way: Most people who bought a house on the water, bought it because they love being near/on the water. At the same time, the wakeboarders/surfers/fisherman/skiiers that are on the lake are there for the exact same reason. Maybe the boaters on the water don't like the fact that "their" once peaceful, serene lake now has houses littering the shoreline. Maybe the fisherman doesn't like the skiier, and the skiier doesn't like the wakeboarder, and the wakeboarder doesn't like the surfer, and the surfer doesn't like the tuber, and the tuber doesn't like the jetskiier. It doesn't matter! These are public resources and owning land near them does not give you the moral high-ground to legislate against others. Plus, keep in mind, there is always someone with a bigger wake and a smaller wake than yours. Be careful who you choose to fight to take the water from........ because there's someone right behind you that wants to do the same thing to you.

Now don't get me wrong... I, and everyone else, understand there is no excuse for surfing 40' off the shoreline on a large lake OR blasting profane music near shore OR being a drunk ahole on the water, etc, etc, etc . Nobody here likes or sympathizes with these folks.....trust me. That's not what we're talking about here though: We're talking about 'erosion concerns' caused from boat wakes.........and last time I checked all power boats create them. Like I said before, one season of high water and/or increased flow does more erosion and shoreline reshaping than 10 lifetimes of boat wakes combined.

Just my 2 cents.

Come on now, a little perspective please.....

1. It wasn't until recent years (ie. less than 10 or 15 years) that monster wakes were desirable, nor generally being made intentionally. When my old Malibu Skier was make (1989) the goal was to have NO wake....good for water skiing. It's only been in the last 10 or so years that a monster wake has been desirable for water sport activity....so that guy who bought his house on the lake 10 years ago didn't buy a house with a whole bunch of wake activity. That came later!

2. Yes, all boats make a wake, but we're not talking about that here. We're talking about pleasure craft which intentionally create a much larger wake than they otherwise would for the purpose of some water sport (wakeboarding wakesurfing, etc.).

3. Just because the water is a public resource (in theory) doesn't mean that irresponsible behavior (ie. how the resource is used) is somehow a free-for-all. In fact, quite the reverse. A public resource means you have an extra obligation to your fellow members of public (which you may not have on your own private land/water).

[Bradley Thornton]

We may be talking erosion, but some of your comments have sparked my own questions. I own a place in the Parker Keys, always dreamed of it, a few years ago became a reality. When we use to cruise through there, never blasted my music as I knew people lived there and sound really travels through the canals. The a hole that comes through at 2am with the loudest stereo and engine partying through there, what about him? Turns out our property line goes half way into the canal, which means your neighbors property is the other half, making all the canals private property. Sure there is a public river just around the bend, but can I take a paint ball gun to him for trespassing? to put it into perspective, it would be like me driving infront of your house and blasting my stereo as loud as I want. I don't know about your lake or area, but I know plenty of smaller lakes here where owners are paying taxes and fees to live there and help keep the place maintained. They should get a vote.

The land is Private but the water is public. I would almost bet with a little homework that in most cases so many feet off the water is public too like 2 or 3 feet maybe wrong but you maybe surprised on most rivers I am almost positive. Like I said before morally it is wrong by far but it is your right as a American.

[wakebrdr94]

@ brad

Nope, parcels are divided from the white line in front of your house to half way across the canal. Docks and houses are to the water, no 2-3ft off the water. I was told if I wanted to take my dock out to the middle I could so, just would not be the most popular guy on the water. Ill play devils advocate, By your theory, I suppose I could put chains with poles just below the water line and let props hit them all day. Personally, I don't care if they cruise, just don't be a d bag and wake the kid at 2 am when the whole canal is dark. Or at least throw me a beer.

And as far as your right as an American, i would agree IF people actually took accountability for their actions. If your wake slammed a boat against a dock, and the owner later chased you down and blamed you, I doubt you would just cut him a check, without claiming you wanted proof it was your wake. (not claiming you in particular, just giving an example).

Edited October 20, 2012 by wakebrdr94

[wakesetter8796]

[Night Rider]

Stepping away from the noise ordinance issue that seems to be tied to erosion claims, the problem here is that there's lack of knowledge about weight damage. Physics states that a wake traveling at 22 mph has more energy than a Surf wake at 10 mph at twice the height.

[mattm]

The study below doesn't exactly concur with the above statement.

http://coastalscience.noaa.gov/news/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Technical-Memorandum-NOS-NCCOS-143.pdf

[Jimmypooh]

I conducted a science experiment back in grade school that lends itself to this subject, so I'll put in my .02.

Background:

We have a place on the Chain-O-Lakes in Northern Illinois. Affording to the Fox Waterway Agency, it is the busiest inland recreational waterway per acre in the United States. Combined with the unrestricted size of boats on the Chain, we have a lot of large wakes. The lake we are on has a shoreline that is over 80% comprised of seawalls.

Experiment:

Find the difference in wave dissipation rate with regards to the angle of the shoreline (vertical vs beach angled).

Results:

It comes as no surprise that a vertical seawall reflects nearly all of the wave's energy back out to the open water, and a beach like angle dissipates nearly all of the wave's energy at the shoreline. The interesting thing I found was that if you reversed the angle and had the seawall angle out toward the lake, it would cause nearly the same high dissipation rate of the beach style angle.

Why this matters to this discussion:

It's impractical to replace a natural beach with a seawall angled beach because those seawalls would get slimy and dangerous to walk on. There are two practical solutions that would work to stop erosion and not negatively affect the usability of the water. The first is to place large rock beaches/walls. The in and out nature of the gaps in the wall will help dissipate the wakes while protecting the shore line. The rocks would have to be large enough that they are not easily moved by waves.

The last option is a seawall that is angled out toward the lake. This overhanging seawall would protect the shoreline while dissipating waves and would not be unsafe.

[Jimmypooh]

One other addition I'd like to make...

When surfing, we always surf in the middle of the lake (deeper is better anyway). We also continually turn toward the surf side running in a big circle. This effectively highly dissipates the wake by the time it gets to any shoreline. This occurs because you are spreading out the wake over a larger area by the time it hits the shore. The energy is still the same, but it's not focused on a small area, it has been spread out.

[Ronnie]

I'm a waterfront home owner. IMO, if you buy property next to a recreation area, people are going to recreate next to you. That means fisherman around your dock, tubers, wakeboarders, skiers, surfers, etc. infront of your dock. That means loud stereos, screaming little girls and boys and other general noise from humans having fun that you will most likely hear. That means loud exhaust noise from the power cruiser flying by as well as most V-8 powered boats. Profanity loaded songs are not something I like but some people that recreate do, not my call. Waterfront owners need to protect that shoreline just the same as they protect their home from rain, sleet & snow damage. Lakefront property owners should be responsible to build a defense against wave action and erosion if it's a boat caused erosion, it's a lake and that damage is gonna happen. If they don't prepare their property to be able to survive the waves created on a lake, it's mostly their fault. There is absolutely no reason to stop one kind of boating style when ALL boats create a wake. Whose gonna measure the size of the wave before it hits your property?

[IXFE]

I live in Oregon, so I have a few comments about the Willametter River (as it's been metioned a few times here). The section of river in question is not in Portland, as some have stated. It is upriver in the Newberg / Willsonville area (suburbs of Portland) and the restriction is a "no wake enhancing devices" rule along a 17 mile stretch of river (219 bridge to Canby ferry). The justification for the ban of wake enahncing devices is what is stated by the OP... shoreline erosion concerns. If that is true, then let me ask the following questions:

1) Do boats without ballast tanks and wedges make wakes that affect the shore line? Or do they magically disipate before hitting shore??

2) Does an old man cruising down the river in a Chris Craft going 12mph make zero wake? Is it not bigger than most surf wakes I see??

3) Does the fact that the river depth fluctuates throughout the year from 48' to 84' somehow not impact the shore line? If you think this type of water level change does erode the shoreline, should we also ban the things that cause it (rainfall, mother nature, letting water out of the Lake Detroit dam over 100 miles way).

4) If wake enhancing devices are really that bad, why are they only banned on 17 miles of the river (the same 17 mile stretch that happens to have all the fancy homes on it)? Do wakeboard wakes magically disappear on the rest of the Willamette River?

One more question... is Surf Gate a "wake enhancing device?"

Edited October 20, 2012 by IXFE

[Bradley Thornton]

The study below doesn't exactly concur with the above statement.

http://coastalscienc...S-NCCOS-143.pdf

I'm not talking about any person but I just waisted 20 min of my life. Really this is so stupid this is what are tax money goes to all this paper is is common since. Wow I am so surprised that a 360 ft wide canal with 6 to 10ft high trees the wind only lets the wave get up .35ft when it hits the shore line and a boat wave is up to 75% bigger and does 75% more damage wow so a boat does more damage I could have saved us all some $ and just told them that. LOL This is boat speed he said wave speed. Again I'm not talking about you mattm just the paper.

[wakebrdr94]

@ixfe

So you can wakeboard along that stretch? Just can't get caught with a wedge down?

[UWSkier]

I'm a waterfront home owner. IMO, if you buy property next to a recreation area, people are going to recreate next to you. That means fisherman around your dock, tubers, wakeboarders, skiers, surfers, etc. infront of your dock. That means loud stereos, screaming little girls and boys and other general noise from humans having fun that you will most likely hear. That means loud exhaust noise from the power cruiser flying by as well as most V-8 powered boats. Profanity loaded songs are not something I like but some people that recreate do, not my call. Waterfront owners need to protect that shoreline just the same as they protect their home from rain, sleet & snow damage. Lakefront property owners should be responsible to build a defense against wave action and erosion if it's a boat caused erosion, it's a lake and that damage is gonna happen. If they don't prepare their property to be able to survive the waves created on a lake, it's mostly their fault. There is absolutely no reason to stop one kind of boating style when ALL boats create a wake. Whose gonna measure the size of the wave before it hits your property?

Can you modify your shoreline by adding rip rap, sea-walls, etc?

We can't. Can't bring in any gravel, can't bring in sand, can't build a sea wall. Not supposed to move rocks around. Fortunately our lake is extremely rocky and the shoreline the whole way around pretty much is lined with 5-20" rocks. Breaks up the wakes nicely.

[Ronnie]

Yes we can add that and already have. Sounds like an issue with the governing body that's not allowing adequate protection instead of the boats if they won't let you protect your shoreline.

[CliffB]

Bill & Wakbrdr - See above.

CliffB-

Item #1. In 1988 your boat created more wake than the slow trolling & stationary fishing boats before it. Your boat was specifically designed for your choice of water sports. The very definition of 'having a little perspective' would require you to understand that at one time YOU were the guy flying up and down the lake that nobody wanted there. But I suppose water skiiers were always universally accepted & respected by the fisherman who once had their peaceful lake to themselves, right?

Item #2: No WE are talking about 'erosion concerns from boat wakes'. You, and others, are the one's parsing it into the boats & wakes you deem acceptable and not. That's the whole point.

Item #3: See my above post. Nobody, I reapeat, noooobody is advocating irresponsible behavior. The fact the discussion keeps getting turned in that direction is silly.

I don't really understand what you're saying in point #2 or #3 above so it's difficult to comment in response. Re: #3 I certainly didn't suggest anyone is saying irresponsible behavior is acceptable. Re: #2, the whole point is to consider whether there's a reasonable sized wake that doesn't unreasonably burden fellow boaters and property owners, OR, whether individuals have the right to make as big a wake as they want without regard to other boaters or property owners. Some people fall into the former camp, some into the latter. I happen to fall into the former as my experience in life has been that the second approach (ie. no limits upon behavior) rarely works over the long haul in a civilized society with limited public resources.

Regarding #1, my old Malibu makes a very, very modest wake compared to later/more modern boats designed (at least in part) to make a very large wake for the purpose of wake-related water sports such as wake boarding and wake surfing. Yes, back in the day my ski boat made a larger wake than a stationary fishing boat, but it was small enough that nobody really had a problem with it. In fact, my old Malibu Skier was designed (at least in part) specifically to make as small a wake as possible. Related, back in the day, when the water got choppy due to wake accumulation and other boats, water skiers stopped skiing (it no longer was viable to ski on big chop), whereas today the wake-making boats just keep on going, making ever bigger and bigger wave action on the lake. Them's the simple facts.

You see, it's really not comparable. I'm not saying wake-making boats are good or bad....doesn't matter to me either way and that's not really relevant...it just is what it is. But we can recognize that the new boats designed to make big wakes are completely different than the old ski boats designed to make as small as wake as possible (and do so with good success). And the new boats are used in a completely different manner - one which has a much bigger impact on wave action on the lake. Being an old fart as I am, I have enough years under my belt to be able to know first hand how this has changed over time. Back in '88 (1988, not 1888...) my buddies and I would be up and out on the lake by 5:30 am to get flat water...and as soon as there was any wave action by 7:00am we were gone and off the lake. There was no point in hanging around.

On the flip side, as another poster wisely said, if you live on a lake you just have to expect some amount of noise, wave action and a bit of profanity. The debate here is centered on soliciting people's opinions on how much noise/wake/profanity is a reasonable amount to burden other boaters and property owners. My personal sense is that wave action has increased a LOT over the years, in large part due to the nature of the boats on the water and how they're being used, not so much whether there's more boats out there. Not surprisingly, lake front home owners (who are generally wealthy people with influence and $$) are responding by attempting to call upon local authorities to pass ordinances to limit this trend. Naturally, people who just bought a wake boat and are learning how to wake surf aren't too happy about this, and that's where we find ourselves today.

Edited October 21, 2012 by CliffB

[IXFE]

@ixfe

So you can wakeboard along that stretch? Just can't get caught with a wedge down?

Yes, that is correct. According to the law, wakeboarding is fine as long as the boat is unweighted and there's no wedge. Lame huh?

Luckily the Sheriff doesn't enforce it. Never heard of anybody getting a ticket. I still run full ballast and wedge as most people cant tell the difference, I just don't surf in this area because that's a dead giveaway.

And yes, we listen to music when we ride. It's part of the experience.

Edited October 21, 2012 by IXFE