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!

Future of surfing?


Recommended Posts

So this may be a heavy topic for my first post and I wasn't sure where to have this discussion so here goes. I've been reading about legislation recently passed in MN and currently they have established a 200' offset from shore, docks, and personal watercraft. As a boat owner, that distance is fair and reasonable. But there was even discussions regarding a 1000' offset. Fortunately, that distance didn't get any traction but this brings up the concern about the future of surfing. Our lake is 1800' wide and we really only surf there with beginners or early/late season. However, if they did pass a 1000' rule, we couldn't even surf on our lake. Then where do they draw the line on bag sizes or overall ballast weight.

I will say that the lake association is firmly against it because they want to preserve the integrity of the lake.

Does anyone else have issues like this or any future concerns about what future laws will be passed? Or just say f-it. I have a dope boat and just enjoy it now, LOL.

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, drewski300 said:

just say f-it. I have a dope boat and just enjoy it now

And this is exactly why laws are passed.  No one seems to care about anyone else anymore.

Link to comment

As long as people insist on plowing past docks and boats repeatedly there will be people who want the damaging activities limited.

I don't believe that anything has passed.  These appear to be the house and senate bills

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=house&f=hf3770&ssn=0&y=2020

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=Senate&f=SF3624&ssn=0&y=2020

Link to comment

Actually looks like the original bill got merged into a bigger one and was passed

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=Senate&f=SF4499&ssn=0&y=2019

So basically they increased the distance specifically for wake surfing and made it illegal to surf behind anything with a prop behind the transom

Subd. 3. 

Distance from shore. 

On waters of this state, a person may not wake surf at
greater than slow-no wake speed within 200 feet of a:

(1) shoreline;

(2) dock;

(3) swimmer;

(4) raft used for swimming or diving; or

(5) moored, anchored, or nonmotorized watercraft.

Sec. 32. 

Minnesota Statutes 2018, section 86B.315, is amended by adding a subdivision
to read:

Subd. 4. 

Requirements for wake surfing. 

A person may not wake surf unless the
watercraft used to wake surf is powered with a propeller that is forward of the watercraft's
transom or swim platform or powered by a jet drive.

Edited by oldjeep
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, oldjeep said:

Actually looks like the original bill got merged into a bigger one and was passed

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=Senate&f=SF4499&ssn=0&y=2019

So basically they increased the distance specifically for wake surfing and made it illegal to surf behind anything with a prop behind the transom

Subd. 3. 

Distance from shore. 

On waters of this state, a person may not wake surf at
greater than slow-no wake speed within 200 feet of a:

(1) shoreline;

(2) dock;

(3) swimmer;

(4) raft used for swimming or diving; or

(5) moored, anchored, or nonmotorized watercraft.

Sec. 32. 

Minnesota Statutes 2018, section 86B.315, is amended by adding a subdivision
to read:

Subd. 4. 

Requirements for wake surfing. 

A person may not wake surf unless the
watercraft used to wake surf is powered with a propeller that is forward of the watercraft's
transom or swim platform or powered by a jet drive.

Not all bad... but a fishing boat anchored in the dead center of a channel will prevent us from surfing? Ha!

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, oldjeep said:

A person may not wake surf unless the
watercraft used to wake surf is powered with a propeller that is forward of the watercraft's
transom or swim platform
or powered by a jet drive.

i wonder how rules like this will effect front drive stern drives (ie Cobalt Surf Class)?  The prop faces the bow, but still sits past the transom.  Maybe Volvo has to redesign the drive to extend forward past the transom like?  Seems like alot of leverage to apply to the drive.

Edited by Texan32
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Texan32 said:

i wonder how rules like this will effect front drive stern drives (ie Cobalt Surf Class)?  The prop faces the bow, but still sits past the transom.  Maybe Volvo has to redesign the drive to extend forward past the transom like?  Seems like alot of leverage to apply to the drive.

I don't think it would, since the prop on the Volvo Penta FWD would be in front of the trailing edge of the platform (albeit astern of the transom line).  I think this just wipes a regular I/O rear-facing prop  off the acceptable list.  I always cringe when I see people surfing behind a regular I/O.

Link to comment
Just now, Eagleboy99 said:

I don't think it would, since the prop on the Volvo Penta FWD would be in front of the trailing edge of the platform (albeit astern of the transom line).  I think this just wipes a regular I/O rear-facing prop  off the acceptable list.  I always cringe when I see people surfing behind a regular I/O.

i guess that would depend on how the state might monitor sales.  By the written law posted, the Volvo FWD does not technically comply.  While i agree that the exact intent of the drive is to safely use a stern drive for surfing....its still not in compliance. 

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Texan32 said:

i wonder how rules like this will effect front drive stern drives (ie Cobalt Surf Class)?  The prop faces the bow, but still sits past the transom.  Maybe Volvo has to redesign the drive to extend forward past the transom like?  Seems like alot of leverage to apply to the drive.

I think they are fine.  But I am sure if you own one of those boats and do a lot of surfing you will get flagged by the sheriff more than once and you will have to pull up your outdrive to prove you are okay.

 

volv.JPG.6c9a361571901a32cb8f153efd452efd.JPG

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Raleigh said:

Not all bad... but a fishing boat anchored in the dead center of a channel will prevent us from surfing? Ha!

Channel must mean something different where you live.  A channel would always be a no wake zone here

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, oldjeep said:

Channel must mean something different where you live.  A channel would always be a no wake zone here

Channel markers mark the center of the intracoastal waterway from Texas to Boston. Definitely not a no wake zone. 

Edited by Raleigh
  • Like 3
Link to comment

This is sort of like "other" laws .. once it starts its a slippery slope.  That said, I'm downright paranoid about my wake and think the new boats are going to bring more and more regulation.  Its a matter of time.  We had a small, private lake ban surfing but grandfathering current boat owners (but preventing new ones).   I had a pontoon try to exit my wake, on the surf side (and way to close to my surfer) and lets just say I didn't charge him for cleaning his interior   :P 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
27 minutes ago, oldjeep said:

Channel must mean something different where you live.  A channel would always be a no wake zone here

All rivers have channels marked by red/green bouys.  The main channel is the navigable portion of the river and therefore is not a no wake zone.  Doesn't mean a no wake portion wouldn't have a channel.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Raleigh said:

Not all bad... but a fishing boat anchored in the dead center of a channel will prevent us from surfing? Ha!

This is the part I strongly disagree with.  If I'm surfing a line not damaging docks, shoreline or anything else and a fisherman comes in and drops anchor near me I have to stop.  Why does he have more rights to water then I do?

Here in Anoka/Champlin I know a few people who surf the Mississippi river (I don't, I'm too afraid of hitting something) according to Wikipedia the bridge is 1,038.4 feet long.  So all surfing on the Mississippi at least around here is over.  These idiot MN politicians don't think anything through. I can compromise with some regulations but just make it fare for everyone!

How are they going to enforce this? How can they prove you were less than 1000ft offset?

I think I'll have to invest in range finder to make sure I'm in compliance now, any recommendation?

Edited by dcarl
typing in rage
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Raleigh said:

Channel markers mark the center of the intracoastal waterway from Texas to Boston. Definitely not a no wake zone. 

Ah.  In the land of 10,000 lakes channels are narrow things that connect one lake to the next or one bay to the next.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, dcarl said:

This is the part I strongly disagree with.  If I'm surfing a line not damaging docks, shoreline or anything else and a fisherman comes in and drops anchor near me I have to stop.  Why does he have more rights to water then I do?

Here in Anoka/Champlin I know a few people who surf the Mississippi river (I don't, I'm too afraid of hitting something) according to Wikipedia the bridge is 1,038.4 feet long.  So all surfing on the Mississippi at least around here is over.  These idiot MN politicians don't think anything through. I can compromise with some regulations but just make it fare for everyone!

How are they going to enforce this? How can they prove you were less than 1000ft offset?

I think I'll have to invest in range finder to make sure I'm in compliance now, any recommendation?

The law is 200ft offset not 1000

 

Subd. 3. 

Distance from shore. 

On waters of this state, a person may not wake surf at
greater than slow-no wake speed within 200 feet of a:

(1) shoreline;

(2) dock;

(3) swimmer;

(4) raft used for swimming or diving; or

(5) moored, anchored, or nonmotorized watercraft.

Edited by oldjeep
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, oldjeep said:

The law is 200ft offset not 1000

 

Subd. 3. 

Distance from shore. 

On waters of this state, a person may not wake surf at
greater than slow-no wake speed within 200 feet of a:

(1) shoreline;

(2) dock;

(3) swimmer;

(4) raft used for swimming or diving; or

(5) moored, anchored, or nonmotorized watercraft.

I misread the OP.  So 2 extension cords offset no problem, I'm always farther away than that.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, shawndoggy said:

get a surf foil.  you can still surf behind a baby wave on an unballasted boat.

Get a BIG foil!

Link to comment

"nonmotorized watercraft" is interesting as well.  Just thinking of smaller sailboats that don't have a motor but get around a lake pretty well...would be tough trying to dodge them all the time.  As someone who's sailed those types of boats a lot, big wakes aren't awesome to go over but at the same time I'm zipping around the lake pretty well and wouldn't expect the boats to stop surfing just for me.  Canoes/kayaks are obviously a different story.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, IndyFerg said:

Canoes/kayaks are obviously a different story.

I can't begin to count the number of times dumb bunnies with surfers have passed 50 feet from me and my wife in kayaks.  And we usually are within 100 feet of the shoreline.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, oldjeep said:

Ah.  In the land of 10,000 lakes channels are narrow things that connect one lake to the next or one bay to the next.

Not on the rivers they aren't!

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Fffrank said:

Not on the rivers they aren't!

Not what comes to mind to me when someone says channel - but I don't boat on the river.  If a fisherman is anchored in the middle of the river channel he is going to have bigger problems than surf boats ;)

Edited by oldjeep
  • Like 2
Link to comment

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.

×
×
  • Create New...