Wake restrictions bill introduced in Michigan

[Woodski]

4 hours ago, CaptainMorgan said:

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   

12 big dudes fit my description of 'ballast bags' so no, no can do.    

Edited March 3 by Woodski

[The Hulk]

12 hours ago, electricjohn said:

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.

Seawalls and boat lifts 

[The Hulk]

On 3/1/2024 at 9:24 AM, Five Cent Worth said:

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

Name one wake boat CEO that plans on sticking around in this sector for 5yrs let alone a wake boat mfg that's isn't already looking for a buyer.  Too soon?

NMMA, a cult of uselessness started to create jobs by siphoning membership $

NWWA, is what I should start (National Wake Wave Association). 1% of your next wake boat purchase shall be donated to my org. Your boat will be issued a NWWA certified sticker. I promise to increase my salary, .. I mean dedication to creating more rules that ensure your fees rise continuously into the future so that I may ensure my organizations continued success! I'll present excellence trophies to the top 3 brands who lead to the most income to our organization and a 4th newbie of the year award to provide recognition for enticing future donors to feel as if they are missing out, I will actively shun those MFGs that are not NWWA certified and work to pass legislation that actively seeks penalties for 2024 and newer boats missing the NWWA certification. 

 

 

Edited March 3 by The Hulk

[Cole2001]

I hate to say it but the lakes that are trying to implement restrictions just aren't setup for surf boats. There wouldn't be an issue if docks were on pillings and everyone had boat lifts. I am on a large lake and you cannot leave a boat tied to a dock unattended due to winds and boat chop.  Regarding shore erosion, I find it hard to believe that a boat wake happening at a much smaller frequency has a larger impact than a constant breaking wave on a windy day which occurs day and night 12 months a year.  

[The Hulk]

Ice break up and high winds are the #1 shore erosion issue. My folks place has loss about 15+ ft shoreline while I was a kid growing up. That's on a small lake no Watersports that is connected to a ski lake.. they put a seawall in and Wala problem fixed.

Before seawall install at my lake place I've first hand watched ice heave the ground up and push entire ground back 4-5" and bulge my yard up. Incredible forces! 

Sadly however seawalls are being banned for "bowl affect" some installs now require rift raft/rocks in front to dissipate and break waves up instead of bouncing them back. 

[minnmarker]

My lake in Wisconsin is trying to get ahead of the certain eventuality of restrictions.   There is a surf club whose members adhere to a greater distance to shoreline rule than legally required.

No matter what some crew members say here, wake boats do cause shoreline damage and dock issues.  And there are a lot fewer of us than there are fishing and pontooning voters.

Please behave and we may retain some of our surfing venues.

[justgary]

9 hours ago, The Hulk said:

Seawalls and boat lifts 

You didn't state a complete thought, but you seem to suggest that every land owner should have to pay tens of thousands of dollars to mitigate the damage you cause.  I suspect that they see it very differently.

9 hours ago, The Hulk said:

Ice break up and high winds are the #1 shore erosion issue. My folks place has loss about 15+ ft shoreline while I was a kid growing up. That's on a small lake no Watersports that is connected to a ski lake.. they put a seawall in and Wala problem fixed.

Before seawall install at my lake place I've first hand watched ice heave the ground up and push entire ground back 4-5" and bulge my yard up. Incredible forces! 

Sadly however seawalls are being banned for "bowl affect" some installs now require rift raft/rocks in front to dissipate and break waves up instead of bouncing them back. 

You bring up Force Majeure like it happens daily.  This is a common fallacy that wake surfers try to hide behind.  Ice breakup does alter the shoreline, but basically once a year.  High winds may happen once or twice a year, and most likely never cause the size waves that a wake boat causes, and particularly on the size lakes in question.

Rip Rap walls are always better than hard seawalls because they break the energy in the wave rather than reflect most of it back into deeper water.  People don't like Rip Rap because it is very hard to get across it and into the water.  Also, what used to be a one foot high revetment has now grown to three or four feet high because of surf waves.

You telling a landowner to suck it up and just put in some rocks is probably not a useful answer when he knows that all of his neighbors are complaining about the same few boats and their music.  He just wants his peaceful waterfront life back. 

[UWSkier]

11 hours ago, The Hulk said:

Seawalls and boat lifts 

NO

Seawalls only make the wave action on the water worse because they do nothing to attenuate the wave energy.  They just reflect the waves back out.  If you want to destroy a good lake where mirror water is common, install sea walls.

[justgary]

54 minutes ago, UWSkier said:

NO

Soooo, any questions?

[jjackkrash]

Sea walls are about the only thing worse than wake boats.  

[The Hulk]

5 hours ago, UWSkier said:

NO

Seawalls only make the wave action on the water worse because they do nothing to attenuate the wave energy.  They just reflect the waves back out.  If you want to destroy a good lake where mirror water is common, install sea walls.

You must ski? Haha jk jk

[The Hulk]

I don't deny there may be a small  amount of erosion to wake boat Waves but compared to ice its about equal to cow farts and global warming. Granted some areas obviously are prone to wave damage more than others etc. 

If you check satellite images in your areas and go back 20-40yrs depending what your local GIS map has and you will note shoreline change has occurred greatly over time well before wake boats were a thing.

Again I'm not denying certain situations but ice pulling shore lines away and pushing other sides back are a force of nature to be reckoned with. Those properties between two properties with seawalls will get damaged exponentially. Thus the "adjoining" rules for adding seawalls where otherwise not permitted exist. Rocks help but don't do jack against ice in most cases they just get shoved.  

Waterfront is a limited commodity, it will continue to outpace inflation and continue to far outpace wage growth well into the future , that being said it will continue to attract more and more wealth that will mean changing dynamics especially people compared to the past. They will bring their $ and buy the latest toy craze. 

Skiing has almost died as a sport, wakeboarding is following pursuit, perhaps in 10-20yrs we'll say the same of surfing? What's the next craze? Hard to say but maybe it doesn't cause erosion.. e-foils? 

 

 

 

[Woodski]

4 hours ago, The Hulk said:

I don't deny there may be a small  amount of erosion to wake boat Waves but compared to ice its about equal to cow farts and global warming. Granted some areas obviously are prone to wave damage more than others etc.

If the damage, as you say, is minimal why the plethora of legislation being pushed forward?

 

5 hours ago, The Hulk said:

If you check satellite images in your areas and go back 20-40yrs depending what your local GIS map has and you will note shoreline change has occurred greatly over time well before wake boats were a thing.

True, although we don't legislate nature, we do however create a system of laws / ordinances etc to control human behavior and those too have been happening well before wake boats were a thing and will continue until we are extinct.

 

5 hours ago, The Hulk said:

Skiing has almost died as a sport, wakeboarding is following pursuit, perhaps in 10-20yrs we'll say the same of surfing? What's the next craze? Hard to say but maybe it doesn't cause erosion.. e-foils? 

Ignoring the issues, continuing to act as if there are no concerns may be the quickest way to kill the sport.

[UWSkier]

7 hours ago, The Hulk said:

You must ski? Haha jk jk

I do.  There are entire stretches on one of the lakes I ski on back in Wisconsin with sea-wall. It adds a really obnoxious element to trying to find the calm water, and to set up the lake for the skier next in your rotation to not have to ski in a bath tub.

It's like the lakes here in Arizona with canyon walls.  We don't even bother with those stretches.

[The Hulk]

6 hours ago, Woodski said:

If the damage, as you say, is minimal why the plethora of legislation being pushed forward?

 

Because lots of fisherman don't like being rocked in their boat when they go fish right next to surfers then complain, or pontooners who think it's going to be fun to take on a surf wave only to realize it was a mistake and complain about surf boas because of their dumb decisions. Surf boats have obnoxious stereos the entire lake hears. But most of all surf boats represent the rich wealth gap of clientele pushing average Joe off the lakes. 

Look l I get your point. It's valid. I get half the surf boat captains out there are idiots that surf right by docks where boats may not be on a lift and think their cool. (Mostly trailer folk) who are oblivious to local lake etiquette. Doubtful anyone on TMC is one of these morons. Thus why everyone here says to respect distance and the wake they create.

Surfers are simply an easy target for these folks and their legislation. Reminds me of fisherman going after PWCs back in the day for disturbing the peace. 

On many lakes watersports hours were created to make everyone happy. And what happened.. all lakes that established these rules are miniscule property values compared to the lake without. Their values do not appreciate as fast and will never be worth as much. Weather good or bad it's less desirable property to most so it will appreciate less compared to non ski hour lakes/waterfront. Maybe that's good for those who currently own there and like it that way or maybe it's bad depending which side of the fence your on. I only say this because more laws and more legislation often leads to non desired outcomes many don't consider.

IMO I don't think legislation of surf boats makes much sense for actually protecting shoreline erosion, it's just an easy target ppl can get on board with with an easy shiny scapegoat. Now if ppl  want to make legislation for "dangerous large wave creation" that dangers other boaters.. fine.. but the whole shoreline thing from wake boats is a DNR play scare tactic, that sadly may work in some areas. 

Lakes have established slow no wake zones, that by law technically can't legally be enforced but they still DO, because it makes sense. Or slow 10mph rules to mitigate large waves but you can legally surf at 10mph and legally skirt the entire reason the 10mph rule was created for.. 

Lakes can + could easily designate "surf zones" if needed or have a surfer drivers ed course required etc. You need a fishing license why not a surfer captains lisc.? Seems odd to us on TMC but is it for the rich idiot that has never owned a boat and can afford more than anyone here and his first ever boat is a 450k Paragon? The issue is nobody wants to address the actual issues. 

IMO If people want to discuss REAL damage to Lakes then discuss REAL topics like zebra mussels, starry stone wart invasive species, lawn fertilizers, farmers run off and so on. 

My .02 

 

Edited March 4 by The Hulk

[Slayer]

On 2/29/2024 at 8:59 PM, ahopkins22LSV said:

Can help act here:

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

Sent this to everyone I know here in MI.  

[Hemmy]

29 minutes ago, Slayer said:

Sent this to everyone I know here in MI.  

I have received 4 emails back from the representatives that were on the preformed email I sent.  2 are for it and 2 are against it.  The one rep that is for it referred to it as a bipartisan bill, however, the two that are against it are with the other party.  Shocker.

[justgary]

3 hours ago, The Hulk said:

pontooners who think it's going to be fun to take on a surf wave only to realize it was a mistake and complain about surf boas because of their dumb decisions.

How *do* you get past a surf wake in a pontoon?  Most people never thought it was going to be fun.  Even if you do everything right you are probably taking water over the platform.  Doing it once every few times you are out, no problem.  Doing it once every quarter mile, no fun.

3 hours ago, The Hulk said:

Now if ppl  want to make legislation for "dangerous large wave creation" that dangers other boaters.. fine.

Which is it: surf waves don't cause any problem except the non-surfers are all idiots; or surf waves are large and dangerous?

3 hours ago, The Hulk said:

Surfers are simply an easy target for these folks and their legislation.

This could be due to the fact that surfers are the problem.  Yes, education could solve most of the issues, but then you will still get the guy who could go to a bigger lake but chooses the smaller one because it has smooth water.  I still don't get the part where surfers think they need smooth water, but they tell footers and skiers to suck it up and deal with it.

[DRB10SEVEN]

1 hour ago, justgary said:

How *do* you get past a surf wake in a pontoon?  Most people never thought it was going to be fun.  Even if you do everything right you are probably taking water over the platform.  Doing it once every few times you are out, no problem.  Doing it once every quarter mile, no fun.

The same way you cross any big wave. How small of a lake are we talking here? I could understand the frustration of big waves on a tiny lake, but the unfortunate part of this whole discussion is we all share waterways. I have to share mine with some cabin cruisers that throw rollers that make my surf wave look like a joke.  None of us are going to get guaranteed nice water unless you boat on a very private or secluded lake. When we wakeboard, I love going out early or staying out late to get the best water possible. I stay far away from anyone else both for their sake, as well as my own since I don't want to deal with their waves any more than they want to deal with mine.

More to the point, if you are frustrated that you have to cross surf waves when you are out boating, this type of legislation will not change that at all. I can be out in the middle of the deep part of the lake I boat at, and someone will come flying through and slam into our surf wave. They are obviously annoyed, but what am I supposed to do? I cannot get any further from shore, there are no docks around, the water is 30-40ft deep, so technically I would be following all the requirements of this proposed law, and people would still be pissed at us for surfing. Do they get to keep making laws to get me off the lake? How far does this go?

[rennis]

23 minutes ago, DRB10SEVEN said:

 I could understand the frustration of big waves on a tiny lake, but the unfortunate part of this whole discussion is we all share waterways. I have to share mine with some cabin cruisers that throw rollers that make my surf wave look like a joke. 

This is my argument against restricting wake making devices in general.  I understand the problems they are creating on small lakes.  But on the big lakes that we play in here in the PNW, the yachts and cabin cruisers throw rollers with size and energy far greater than any wake boat can muster.  Are we going to restrict those too?  You'd have to make the entire lake a no-wake zone for everyone if the goal is to stop shoreline erosion.  

[dizzygti]

42 minutes ago, DRB10SEVEN said:

More to the point, if you are frustrated that you have to cross surf waves when you are out boating, this type of legislation will not change that at all. I can be out in the middle of the deep part of the lake I boat at, and someone will come flying through and slam into our surf wave. They are obviously annoyed, but what am I supposed to do? I cannot get any further from shore, there are no docks around, the water is 30-40ft deep, so technically I would be following all the requirements of this proposed law, and people would still be pissed at us for surfing. Do they get to keep making laws to get me off the lake? How far does this go?

This.   Politicians want votes.   Wealthy landowners have influence.   Wake boat owners are the easy targets here with the justification being environmental.    Yet just like in this thread, you get comments about "their music" which has nothing to do with the supposed issue at hand.    Are wake boats the only boats with stereos now?    Regardless, this is going to keep going until it goes too far.    I'm just lucky to be on a big enough lake that this won't ever get to that point in my area, but blanket laws aren't the solution.    I had to deal with two cruisers yesterday whose wakes dwarfed mine.   No one died, and I didn't feel the need to contact a local politician.  

[The Hulk]

I'll go back to my original point.. all arguments are about everything "except" the environmental issue they claim and hide behind...

[Woodski]

Except the 4 studies I googled  and posted the link discuss exactly that.

[Raimie]

23 hours ago, Hemmy said:

I have received 4 emails back from the representatives that were on the preformed email I sent.  2 are for it and 2 are against it.  The one rep that is for it referred to it as a bipartisan bill, however, the two that are against it are with the other party.  Shocker.

Thanks for the support. Bottom line IMO, they need to remove the 20' depth rule, and exclude Lake St. Clair in particular. If not, I guess I'll take my chances with the law enforcement not enforcing this complete BS regulation on a lake/river system that shouldn't be lumped in with inland lakes.

[Raimie]

21 hours ago, rennis said:

This is my argument against restricting wake making devices in general.  I understand the problems they are creating on small lakes.  But on the big lakes that we play in here in the PNW, the yachts and cabin cruisers throw rollers with size and energy far greater than any wake boat can muster.  Are we going to restrict those too?  You'd have to make the entire lake a no-wake zone for everyone if the goal is to stop shoreline erosion.  

This  is my issue. Look up Lake St. Clair if you aren't familiar with it. It's the 6th great lake, but due to its average depth being about 10', this BS bill would make wakesports illegal on most of the lake.