Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Sign in to follow this  
mountaineerhill

Lake Anna Wake Restrictions Proposed

Recommended Posts

mountaineerhill

http://www.fredericksburg.com/news/local/spotsylvania/spotsylvania-proposes-new-boating-restriction-on-lake-anna/article_2966b88d-43ae-5f16-9e7d-799971f915d8.html 

 

Hoping this doesn't pass but we'll see. The northern part of our lake is very narrow and this would pretty much rule out any water sports for over half our lake.  

Share this post


Link to post
minnmarker

We already have a 150 foot limit in WI.  Would not be surprised if that is extended to 200 feet (which is the current PWC restriction).  I'm not familiar with Lake Anna but it must be very narrow.

IMHO the resistance to wake boats peaked a couple years ago and people have pretty much accepted them as a part of being on the lake.

Share this post


Link to post
ibelonginprison

It's been proposed on various lakes around the nation numerous times. They usually find a way to distance the boat from the shore or dock, but haven't had much success in limiting the size of wake or banning boats with wake modifying features. It's hard to qualify a "large wake" when you see large cruisers plowing at 10mph, vs a boat set up for surfing at 10.6mph.
I'm actually OK with the distance thing. When I see people surf 20-30' off of a dock, it blows my mind how little respect they have for other people's property. The same for a cruiser, however I rarely see cruisers that close to a dock. Mostly it's water sports boats. 200' is a bit much, I feel. But 100' is probably a fair distance.

 

Thankfully our property is towards the back of a cove where no one surfs or wakeboards. It's the reason we bought there, vs. the main channel. (which was a huge debate for almost a year for y wife and I.) Hypocritical? Maybe. But I realize the downside to being on the main channel is having your dock rocked constantly on the weekends.

Share this post


Link to post
pauley71

I'm on Lake Anna and while I agree the 200' is tight in a lot of areas, most of the lake will be ok.  I tend to stay that far away anyway.  The challenge is during high usage weekends and finding a safe place to surf/board.  

That said, I'm completely against it and will be surprised if the Dept of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) actually approves this state wide b/c of one counties request.  You give these turkeys an inch and they will take a mile (200ft in this case).  Laws against wake boats have to be fought or it will get out of hand.  You are already "responsible for your wake".

I'm on the private/warm side so its a non-issue b/c we don't have coast guard or DNR patrols.  Still don't want it to happen though.

Edited by pauley71

Share this post


Link to post
Sixball

Michigan did entertain a ban on wake enhancing boats. Don't think it went anywhere. I will admit to getting pissed off at some of the wakes on our lake but with that said most are not made from boats for wake sports. So would the no wake enhancing boats help? Maybe but it won't stop large wakes. Also moving wake boats off 200' only changes the shape of the wake, wakes don't dissipate at least not in a distance that could be used in many lakes. Wakes have changed the way we use our lake and makes keeping a boat docked impossible. If my boats are not in use they get put on lifts and lifted over two feet from the water line. I can not leave my ski boat uncovered or it fills up with water from splash back off the sea wall. The pontoon has wet carpet all weekend long in the summer. With all that I am still thinking wake sports are not the killer on our lake. I would suggest good common seance including with sound. Sound, music and loud exhaust, are likely the biggest complaint we get at the lake association. Speed is the other. I will say nearly all of our shore line is developed.  In our country today the few are more often getting there way over the masses. :whistle:  

Share this post


Link to post
ibelonginprison

Only three times I've ever come across waves large enough that I was legitimately concerned about possibly ending up on the bottom of the lake... all three times were large cabin cruisers plowing along. 

Surfboats are a nuisance, but not the ultimate destructive wave generating cause.

Share this post


Link to post
mountaineerhill
4 hours ago, pauley71 said:

I'm on Lake Anna and while I agree the 200' is tight in a lot of areas, most of the lake will be ok.  I tend to stay that far away anyway.  The challenge is during high usage weekends and finding a safe place to surf/board.  

That said, I'm completely against it and will be surprised if the Dept of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) actually approves this state wide b/c of one counties request.  You give these turkeys an inch and they will take a mile (200ft in this case).  Laws against wake boats have to be fought or it will get out of hand.  You are already "responsible for your wake".

I'm on the private/warm side so its a non-issue b/c we don't have coast guard or DNR patrols.  Still don't want it to happen though.

What about the Coast Gaurd pontoon on the warm side? I saw him one night when we were up swimming in the "hot tub". I'm lucky enough to have access to both sides through family friends. 

Share this post


Link to post
sabre
6 hours ago, pauley71 said:

I'm on Lake Anna and while I agree the 200' is tight in a lot of areas, most of the lake will be ok.  I tend to stay that far away anyway.  The challenge is during high usage weekends and finding a safe place to surf/board.  

That said, I'm completely against it and will be surprised if the Dept of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) actually approves this state wide b/c of one counties request.  You give these turkeys an inch and they will take a mile (200ft in this case).  Laws against wake boats have to be fought or it will get out of hand.  You are already "responsible for your wake".

I'm on the private/warm side so its a non-issue b/c we don't have coast guard or DNR patrols.  Still don't want it to happen though.

On the cold side it closes much of the northern and western parts of the lake.  The restriction also doesn't specify the type of activity it restricts the type of boat doing ANY activity therefore making 40+% of a 11,000 acre lake no wake for wakeboard boats.  Direct quote from the proposed regulation: "and further imposes a requirement that no person shall for any purpose, operate any boat or vessel which, as part of its original structure and/or modification, includes but is not limited to ballast tanks, wake plates, wake wedges and any other wake-enhancing capabilities within 200 feed or less of shoreline, docs, piers and boat houses".  

This is far more restrictive than ANY other law or implementation around the country which primarily limits ONLY the act of wake surfing.

Share this post


Link to post
ChainSetter

You guys are lucky! Out here on the chain o lakes my 247 gets tossed by all the huge boats and our lakes are hardly a mile across

Share this post


Link to post
wakerider107

Contact the WSIA, they are prepared for situations like this and get similar proposals turned down constantly. Get them involved if they arent already.

Share this post


Link to post
sabre

They have been contacted,  however their support hasn't been as helpful as we would have liked.  Essentially, their research is being used to support the 200' restriction.  If the good ski/wake/surf parts of the lake were wider than 500', this wouldn't be much of an issue, however, this restriction would close over 40% of the lake to wakeBOATS.  It's the only restriction I've seen that limits the boat and not the activity.

Share this post


Link to post
granddaddy55
On 9/28/2016 at 11:40 AM, mountaineerhill said:

http://www.fredericksburg.com/news/local/spotsylvania/spotsylvania-proposes-new-boating-restriction-on-lake-anna/article_2966b88d-43ae-5f16-9e7d-799971f915d8.html 

 

Hoping this doesn't pass but we'll see. The northern part of our lake is very narrow and this would pretty much rule out any water sports for over half our lake.  

If Ana came to be in 70's then I believe my father owned a 196 acre farm that I believe  were a part of it, sold 1971. Wish we had never done that as I understand other than on the DC border it's some of the most valuable land in VA.  At the time there were some wealthy farmers but it was mostly rural farmland that was family owned and not that valuable at that time, 196 acres well under $40000.00 sold

Share this post


Link to post
nyryan2001

I surf Pigeon Cove primarily so it wouldn't have much effect on me, other than to pile much more water sports traffic into smaller areas.

Share this post


Link to post
mountaineerhill
1 hour ago, nyryan2001 said:

I surf Pigeon Cove primarily so it wouldn't have much effect on me, other than to pile much more water sports traffic into smaller areas.

that is just south of the state park correct?

 

I usually put in at High point and that cove is usually my last run of the day. 

Share this post


Link to post
nyryan2001

Yes Sir.... it's a dead end, so you get a lot less passing traffic.... so it lessens risk to your surfers and to the fewer passing boats  trying to jump over your rollers 

Share this post


Link to post
sabre
On September 30, 2016 at 7:13 AM, nyryan2001 said:

I surf Pigeon Cove primarily so it wouldn't have much effect on me, other than to pile much more water sports traffic into smaller areas.

Pigeon Cove will become the longest surf able (or wake boarding) run on the lake that isn't part of the main channel.  Given the way the restriction is written, many of the wakeboard boats from the northern part of the lake will be there to keep you company.  The bottleneck about halfway in will become crazy to try and navigate with 4-6 surfers or boarders running that cove at 1 time.

Share this post


Link to post
obski
2 hours ago, Wakesetter67 said:

We are in a pretty big battle right now on about 20 miles of our river!  Right now we currently have about 4 miles of river to ride using WED, and about 16 miles that have baned WED.  And now more homeowners want to ban another one and a half miles of river leaving us with roughly 3 miles to Surf or Wake board,  when this first went in effect in 2008 we thought we would have enough support to stop it,  what I thought the main complaint was people that live on the river we're concerned about bank erosion and their docks,  come to find out the other day it was the waterskiers did not want the wakeboard/wake surfers on their stretch of the water because it messed it up,  similar to the snow skiers and the snowboarder war,  so now we have the big guns showing their support Malibu and some of the other manufactures along with the WISA,  we are currently sending in petitions for the board to open up the rules making process so we can voice our concerns,  The biggest issue is safety!!  The sport of wake surfing has more than tripled since 2008 now you have everybody  cramed in about a 4 mile stretch of river using weds which is very dangerous,  while I don't think they will lift the ban we have propose a compromise to open up 5 miles of the river  which is mostly farmland that is wider and will help relieve the congestion up river! stay tune it's going to be a long winter to fight this

This is not completely true. I was very involved back in 2008 when the present rules were being proposed, and presented comment at the OSMB meeting regarding the rules. I can say with certainty that waterskiers had nothing to do with them, and in fact presented consistent opposition to the rules (as did 90% of those giving commentary, including the sheriffs and most river homeowners). There was an organized opposition, including AWS and others in the industry, but it was all for naught. In my opinion, the outcome was predetermined, with the board bowing to the whim of the governor at that time, Ted Kulongoski. I believe that there were a few wealthy homeowners in the Butteville area that had the ear of Kulongoski, who was very anti motor boats in general. 

The rules never really had an effect on my boating activity. We have changed our activities to mostly skiing, but have used WEDs as needed for boarding and surfing, and not worried about it. We are most often out though when we are alone on the river and have rarely seen a sheriff. I have noticed, the times when I have been on the river during busy times, that there are lots of boats running ballast for boarding and surfing. I wonder if any tickets are being issued? I don't know. I am not going to get involved in this round with the OSMB.

Good luck to the OP in your fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Sixball
56 minutes ago, obski said:

This is not completely true. I was very involved back in 2008 when the present rules were being proposed, and presented comment at the OSMB meeting regarding the rules. I can say with certainty that waterskiers had nothing to do with them, and in fact presented consistent opposition to the rules (as did 90% of those giving commentary, including the sheriffs and most river homeowners). There was an organized opposition, including AWS and others in the industry, but it was all for naught. In my opinion, the outcome was predetermined, with the board bowing to the whim of the governor at that time, Ted Kulongoski. I believe that there were a few wealthy homeowners in the Butteville area that had the ear of Kulongoski, who was very anti motor boats in general. 

The rules never really had an effect on my boating activity. We have changed our activities to mostly skiing, but have used WEDs as needed for boarding and surfing, and not worried about it. We are most often out though when we are alone on the river and have rarely seen a sheriff. I have noticed, the times when I have been on the river during busy times, that there are lots of boats running ballast for boarding and surfing. I wonder if any tickets are being issued? I don't know. I am not going to get involved in this round with the OSMB.

Good luck to the OP in your fight.

Its amazing the roomers that get started on things like this! I have been working with a small group on our lake to keep it full of water. We have put in so many hours on it and worked with federal, state, and local government along with many other people. But all I want to say is if you wish to fight things like this get involved don't take much you get without investigating. More often then not its far from the truth!  If you get people who have skin in the game and only use proven data people and agencies  will work with you. We are getting court rulings going our way. We have had A township stand up with us and took our case to court. It saved us some significant cost. We have local papers publishing information and stories at no cost to us. As obski  said getting involved gives you much better information. Things like this will take years of work but if you want it fight for it but be smart and fair.

Share this post


Link to post
obski
1 hour ago, Wakesetter67 said:

Great point, I would like you all to meet the newest member of the OSMB advisory committee! I thought if there's going to be a change, then I want to be involved, And I take what Larry from the WISA says as he knows first hand what went on in our area, I got the ball rolling on this and Jack Springer got me in touch with Larry and they want to help in any way they can! 

Good for you to get involved and I hope that your voice, and that of most boating Oregonians, will be listened to. In Oregon, the board serves at the pleasure of the governor. Back in 2008 the long serving director, Paul Donheffner, was opposed to some of the rules changes that Kulongoski was pushing through, and then he was suddenly the target of state audits. He was asked to step down, so he retired the next year and was replaced. I don't know where our current governor stands on these issues. The last time around with this, the presentation of scientific data, the opinion of 90% of the people who used or lived on the river, etc, made no difference. Again, the board serves at the pleasure of the governor.

Share this post


Link to post
Sixball

So now look into the process it took to get the current law into place. Was the proper channels used or was it pushed through under the table? One of the things we have done is have three of our board members get clearance to receive more protected Freedom of information data. Its requires background checks to get higher levels but once you do many of the proceeding will be more open to you or your group. The recipients of the data  can not give the documents to the group but can lead you in the directions that will help you if something was not up to snuff.  Its slow but much better then speculating. Build a profile how the law effects the community.  In your case work with the business that will lose, or have the ability to prosper from having an open (All sports) lake. How does the law effect real-estate values? Does it hurt the taxable income to the county. Just some quick questions I would be going for. So now the hard thing if the data is not working you will need to be open and not manipulate things to help or your group will not be respected and lose the ability to work with the people, governments, officials that you will need to move on. This will be a long process.  We have been working for years but making good progress. We have stopped things from going into place that could have hurt our lake.  Good luck!

 

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...