Followup Re. ANR Wake Boat Decision

One of my readers shared my post about Agency Of Natural Resource's wake boat decision with John Widness who is organizer for Responsible Wakes for Vermont Lakes and lives in Wilmington, VT. Here is his response, with some interesting information:

Jack Widness, Jan 7, 2024, 1:41 PM (2 days ago)

In thinking of the 15 lakes — including Joe’s Pond — that will be severely adversely affected by the ANR’s recent wake boat rule announcement, I find this hugely disturbing to both me personally and to our Responsible Wakes for Vermont Lakes (RWVL) group. At greatest risk of adverse effects of this rule are those 15 lakes that would have no wake boating permitted if the 1,000-ft minimal distance from shore for wake boating goes into effect … but WILL have wake boating permitted if the ANR’s recommended rule of 500-ft minimal distance is approved. In addition to Joe’s Pond, those lakes include Harvey’s Lake, Shadow Lake, Lake Fairlee, Sunset Lake, Lake Groton, Peacham Pond, Lake Iroquois, and others.

 It is because of what will happen to these lakes that I am continually thinking what can be done to have a favorable change on this situation. Right now, there is only the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (LCAR) meeting scheduled for Feb 1 standing in the way of ANR for implementing their 500-foot rule. While our RWVL group will continue to do all we can to achieve a greater distance from shore, the public can also have a significant impact on the thinking of LCAR and the ANR. Do you think that others in the Joe’s Pond Association as well as those non-association members locally, might be willing to help? One way to help would be to have those interested and motivated to write to your local newspapers (letters to the editor and op-ed pieces) expressing their frank comments with bearing on the timely wake boat distance from shore topic included in the ANR’s Jan 3^rd final rule proposal.  To have an impact on the ANR and LCAR, these submissions to local news outlets must be done in the next few remaining weeks before LCAR meets. If any of your group submits news items to the local papers, they should be sure to copy your local legislators to keep them informed of their wishes.

 To reach out to as many of Joe’s Pond’s interested potential supporters who may want to help, I have copied those who have signed up of our RWVL Newsletter. I hope that doing that was okay.  I thought it might be okay because 75% of the Joe’s Pond Association who responded to the JPA survey done last February were in favor of the 1,000-ft distance from shore.

 Any thoughts you or others have about the above would be much appreciated.  And if articles are published in your local papers with comments about the wake boat issue, please let me know. 

Thank you again for sharing the link to the Jan 6^th issue of Joe’s Pond Reflections! 

Jack

A Joe's Ponder asked if the state will mark areas that are 20 feet deep and 200 feet wide in lakes, and observed that according to nautical mapping, there are few areas "20 feet deep and 500 feet from shore AND 200 feet wide."

In response to this, Jack LaGue sent a link to a PDF showing an area at the south end of Joe's Pond that meets that criteria. This area is directly off of the state boating access and I imagine people trying to launch or land boats won't be happy with the incoming waves if there is a wake boat playing around in that area.

Another Joe's Ponder commented that would be like a huge washing machine. 

According to a poll done last year, a large majority of property owners on Joe's Pond (about 75%) were in favor of the 1000 ft. regulation. The last resort for possibly turning ANRs decision around is the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (LCAR) which is meeting on February 1, so you need to contact your legislators right away and make your wishes known. If the 500 ft. rule stands, all we can do is hope families find some other hopefully less damaging and controversial entertainment, and the wake boat fad will eventually subside.