Wake restrictions bill introduced in Michigan

[MalibuNation]

This bill was just introduced.  Hope it doesn't go through:

https://mymlsa.org/critical-boat-wake-legislation-introduced-in-michigan-house/

[ahopkins22LSV]

Can help act here:

https://wsia.quorum.us/campaign/57373/

[MalibuNation]

The sponsor of the bill is from Kalamazoo and there's the large over 1,000 acre Austin Lake in the city of Portage which borders Kalamazoo.  It's no more than 15' deep ... no more wake enhancements there?

[dizzygti]

Doesn't affect me, but I hate to see this.   

[Bluefishcay]

I think we are going to see a lot more laws like this.  Self regulation isn’t working and people not surfing don’t like dealing with big waves.  

Edited March 1 by Bluefishcay

[COOP]

3 minutes ago, Bluefishcay said:

I think we are going to see a lot more laws like this.  Self regulation isn’t working and people don’t like dealing with big surf.  

Yup.

[Five Cent Worth]

Shocked that boat manufactures aren't more involved in fighting as well as the NMMA.  

[Hemmy]

10 minutes ago, Five Cent Worth said:

Shocked that boat manufactures aren't more involved in fighting as well as the NMMA.  

Boat manufacturers aren't helping the cause either.  They are just supplying demand, but everything is getting bigger and bigger to make bigger waves.  There isn't much more they can do to be more innovative to wave enhancing features so now they are just designing and pushing the bigger boats.

I am on a small lake in Michigan so etiquette is everything to me.  Unfortunately, it is not the same to everybody else on the lake.  A lot of people on my lake have zero etiquette, and not just wake boaters.  I would venture to say the push for wake restrictions is more against the people using the boats than it is the damage the boats are causing.

Edited March 1 by Hemmy

[DRB10SEVEN]

If this law is passed, I am sure there will be zero more issues with people being annoyed by wake boats, and the problem will be solved! Remember, we are always just 1 law away from fixing our problems!

[Michigan boarder]

This is alarming, how do they define "wake sports mode"?  That could encompass everything behind a boat, since the rider is behind the boat in the wake doing the sport whether it's skiing, tubing, footing, surfing, wakeboard, kneeboard, etc.  

[Michigan boarder]

Defined:

LInk to the doc here:

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(4npiteyqqxatfs4nmwzl2pve))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2024-HB-5532

 

[Bluefishcay]

50 minutes ago, Five Cent Worth said:

Shocked that boat manufactures aren't more involved in fighting as well as the NMMA.  

+1, I am sure if this passes it will cut demand for the biggest margin boats and probably cut volume.  Not sure how they will fight it as it’s actually written pretty well to address the issue and based on the data from the Minnesota study.   Living on a small lake, I can see bans coming.  It’s not if, but when.  

[RyanB]

To me it often comes down to enforcement.  Reality is that there are laws in place already that could likely be used to address the majority of the complaints.  If the laws on the books aren’t already enforced, how will new regulations help?

[dizzygti]

17 minutes ago, RyanB said:

To me it often comes down to enforcement.  Reality is that there are laws in place already that could likely be used to address the majority of the complaints.  If the laws on the books aren’t already enforced, how will new regulations help?

THIS!   200 ft law went into effect in my state on July 1st last summer.....I saw no change in behavior from before to after nor any actual increase in patrols or enforcement.   

[Hemmy]

32 minutes ago, RyanB said:

To me it often comes down to enforcement.  Reality is that there are laws in place already that could likely be used to address the majority of the complaints.  If the laws on the books aren’t already enforced, how will new regulations help?

There is little enforcement on our lake.  Last year they were out frequently, which was a surprise.  The downside and maybe upside is they show up, do a lap around the lake and approach a couple of boats and leave.  I was approached a couple of years ago.  I wasn't doing anything wrong, but they just wanted to check registration and make sure I had fire extinguishers on board.  I was all good and he told me to have a nice day and safely enjoy myself and off to the next boat he went.  They are never on our lake for extended periods of time.

[Hemmy]

14 hours ago, ahopkins22LSV said:

Can help act here:

https://wsia.quorum.us/campaign/57373/

I submitted this.  I also included in the body how this would damage dealers like Tommy's.  Also mentioned Tommy's impact on the community through fund raising for local Children's hospitals and the work they do with adaptive wake sports in the community.

[MalibuNation]

So will law enforcement be checking depth if this bill goes through?

I know in my state rep is against this bill.

[EchelonMike]

500' seems reasonable for distance from the shore or from docks, but I don't get the depth issue.  Are you telling me a 20-25' bowrider with a draft that is 1-2 ft deeper than an inboard, that weighs a similar amount, disturbs the lake/river bed less than a surf boat?  I say no way.  I'd love to see a study of a "regular" bowrider at 10.8 MPH and a surf boat at 10.8 MPH and show bottom disturbance.  My guess is one of these boats passing 16-17' above at the surface of a 20' depth doesn't show any difference.

[jjackkrash]

8 hours ago, RyanB said:

To me it often comes down to enforcement.  Reality is that there are laws in place already that could likely be used to address the majority of the complaints.  If the laws on the books aren’t already enforced, how will new regulations help?

Having the law on the books would make me feel more morally justified when unholstering my middle finger between ski sets.    

[justgary]

14 hours ago, EchelonMike said:

500' seems reasonable for distance from the shore or from docks, but I don't get the depth issue.  Are you telling me a 20-25' bowrider with a draft that is 1-2 ft deeper than an inboard, that weighs a similar amount, disturbs the lake/river bed less than a surf boat?  I say no way.  I'd love to see a study of a "regular" bowrider at 10.8 MPH and a surf boat at 10.8 MPH and show bottom disturbance.  My guess is one of these boats passing 16-17' above at the surface of a 20' depth doesn't show any difference.

Is the depth thing about disturbing the bottom, or more about the way the wave stands up in shallow water?

[EchelonMike]

41 minutes ago, justgary said:

Is the depth thing about disturbing the bottom, or more about the way the wave stands up in shallow water?

They are making this an "environmental" issue.  If you read the bill, it talks about the condition of the lake and river bottom, etc.  You'd have to show me a detailed research study to convince me that a wakeboat is worse than a similar sized and powered runabout.  They're probably worse due to draft, prop angle, etc as far as disturbing the bottom of the lake or river.  

[electricjohn]

I can show you before and after pictures of my, and all my neighbors, eroded shorelines since surfing boats became the new status symbol on my lake. See, you can't show off your 1/4-million-dollar boat to the other lakefront owners if you surf out in the middle of the lake.

[Raimie]

So this means it would be illegal to wakeboard on Lake St. Clair and Houghton and other lakes that aren't 20' deep... if the wedge is deployed??

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(xitfvj2tlpfz1wmj1t3es5h4))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2024-HB-5532

[Woodski]

@EchelonMike - here are 4 studies, I simply did a quick google search:

https://lastwildernessalliance.org/wake-surfing-ballast-tanks-copy

I have not read them, simply googled it from your question.

 

[CaptainMorgan]

8 minutes ago, Raimie said:

So this means it would be illegal to wakeboard on Lake St. Clair and Houghton and other lakes that aren't 20' deep... if the wedge is deployed??

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(xitfvj2tlpfz1wmj1t3es5h4))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2024-HB-5532

interesting point - even though we all suspect they mean to target surf waves, an early morning wakeboard session on a 90's Response with one lead bag to balance the boat or wedge deployed would be in violation...

BUT if you grab a 26LSV, paid 12 big dudes to ride along as spotters (safety!), each with a giant case of water (hydration is critical!) then you can shred all you want and the erosion will be none the wiser