Ice Fisher Rescued and Wake Boat Regulation Clarification

 An article from the Caledonian Record this morning: Ice Fisherman Rescued

The wake boat issue addressed by Rep. Henry Pearl in an email to me in response to my recent inquiry:

 Henry Pearl

Thanks so much for reaching out. I've been following this issue closely and similarly wish the ANR rule had been for 1000'. Kathrine Sims introduced a bill that I support to allow any community to ban wake boats: https://legislature.vermont.gov/bill/status/2024/H.64. Unfortunately it didn’t get any traction this session and probably won’t due to the number of pressing issues we are facing at this time.

That said, we are now at the stage when the ANR rules goes to the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (LCAR). This is a committee made up of four senators and four representatives. Their job is to vote to adopt a proposed rule or not. They do not have the ability to amend or change a rule. This means that right now, in the February meeting when the wake boat rule will be up, there are two options: vote to adopt the 500' rule or not. If they do not adopt the rule, there will be no rule governing wake boats in place. While the 500' may not be the most desirable outcome, from my perspective, it is better than no rule at all, which would leave all lakes vulnerable to wake boats and not rules for their use on those lakes. 

This is also just a starting point. If LCAR adopts the 500' rule, we will have immediate protections for our lakes. It also outlines a process by which communities can seek to have wake boats banned on their lake. Also, it doesn't prevent future legislation to increase the distance (or all out ban wake boats) from being introduced and taken up in future legislative sessions. If I am back in Montpelier next biennium I will certainly introduce new legislation to increase the rule. I would introduce legislation as a shoreline protection bill so it would hopefully end up in the natural resources committee where I think their is more of an appetite for this topic than in transportation where Kathrine’s bill ended up.

Again, I understand and appreciate your disappointment, and I think this rule is still a positive next step for our lakes. 

Happy to talk more about this or other issues as the session moves along,

Representative Henry Pearl

Cal-West District

Ag & Forestry Committee

Hpearl@leg.state.vt.us

802-535-9409

 

 

This makes good sense to me. If there is a chance the Natural Resources Committee may be more sympathetic to the case for stronger regulations, perhaps Rep. Pearl can get somewhere with it - of course if he is elected for another term. He is probably more aware of the damage than some others because he owns the small island here at Joe's Pond.

 

 

6:34 AM (3 hours ago)
to me