The actual language of Senate Bill 12, formerly SB 385, the SAFE LAKES BILL is at the bottom of the page.
'Safe Lakes' Bill signed into law by the Governor!
NOW IN EFFECT STATEWIDE
This is a great victory for the BCLF, WAL and for all those who work to protect and preserve our lakes!
The new law took effect at the beginning of the 2010 boating season.
DNR signed water ski take-off and drop zones are exempt.
This law has no impact on personal watercraft.
Local towns may choose to opt for greater or lesser distance from shore buffers. Go to the end of this page for instructions.
Also check out '100' Boating Accident' page and the "Safe Lakes" History page.
SB 12, the 'Safe Lakes' Bill
100' from shore No-wake bill
Wisconsin
has many wonderful lakes. We also have many good regulations in place to
protect them. A much needed rule that will make lakes safer and healthier may
soon be on the books. The following is the testimony offered to the Assembly Natural Resources Committee on March 11, 2009 by Jim Brakken, lead advocate for this bill. It gives many of the reasons why a 100 foot from shore no-wake rule makes good sense for Wisconisn's lakes.
I
live on WileyLake in BayfieldCounty. WileyLake is 59 acres and has a lot of undeveloped shoreline. It
is not uncommon to see boats with 150 and even 200 horse motors on WileyLake during the boating season.
I am a retired public school
teacher and I now devote most of my time to the effort to protect and preserve Wisconsin’s remarkable but fragile freshwater resources.I am President of the BayfieldCountyLakes Forum and the CableLake Association. I am a Delegate to the Wisconsin Conservation Congress and a past President of the Wisconsin Association of Lakes. I also represent the Northwest Wisconsin Water
Consortium here today.
There was a time, many
decades ago, when boat motors were all small. The few that did exist did little
harm to our lakes and our lake users. But motors grew, both in size and number.
I believe it was back in the 1940s or ’50s that the Wisconsin Conservation
Department required us to go slow when within 100 feet of docks, rafts and
other boats. I learned from the UWEX Lakes Team that the average motor size back
then was 3.6 horsepower. Today it approaches 100 horsepower and,according
to the DNR website, Wisconsin has more than 575,000 registered boats – about
one for every ten residents. That number has nearly doubled in the last 4
decades and will continue to increase. Wisconsin also has an estimated 325,000 non-motorized
boats, about 75 percent of these are canoes and kayaks. Canoes and
kayaks are ideal for exploring the shallows near shore. Another 300,000-or-so
motorized boats visit our lakes from neighboring states. And, according to
the DNR website, the boats plying Wisconsin waters are
getting bigger. More than 40 percent of the registered boats in 1997–98 were
between 16 and 39 feet long, compared to just 18 percent 20 years earlier. We
have more boats with bigger engines and this trend is not likely to change.
When personal watercraft (PWCs)
or Jet Skis came on the scene, it was clear that they could do damage in the very
shallow water near shore. The threat to habitat and safety resulted in PWCs
being required to stay at least 200 feet from shore, unless at a no wake speed.
That sound decision was made in the mid 1990s. SB 12 would not change the
current PWC regulations.
Although our existing law
requires this 200-foot no-wake buffer for jet skis and similar personal
watercraft, we still allow very fast boating near our natural, undeveloped
shorelines. Motors keep getting bigger, more powerful and more plentiful. It is
time we catch up with technology. This new bill does just that by requiring
fast boating to be done at least 100 feet from our natural, undeveloped
shorelines.
If this bill becomes law,
there will be a handful of lakes that will suffer some degree of recreational
impairment. To address this, SB 12 includes an opt-out provision, allowing a local
government to exclude a lake if this law significantly impacts recreation. This
offers local control, using the same process now available, to address the
needs of those few individual lakes. For example, if a lake association felt
this law created a hardship, they could petition their local town board to have
the lake excluded. If a water ski club could no longer do its weekend
fundraising show, the local government could exempt the lake or part of the
lake from the rule.
Speaking of water skiers,
this bill excludes pick-up and drop zones for water skiers. This addresses the
needs of those who enjoy water skiing, tubing and similar activities. It also
means that parents who want to teach their kids to ski will still be able to do
this from the beach rather than in deep water, just as they have been doing for
years.
I am told by Judge Chuck
Dykman of Monona, that all DaneCounty lakes have had this law in effect for almost a decade
with no problems or objections. Senator Miller verified this.
The Wisconsin Association of
Lakes supports this effort, as you will hear today.
The Wisconsin Conservation
Congress Warm Water (lakes) Committee stands behind this. Also, at the 2006
Wisconsin Conservation Congress Spring Hearings, all 72 counties supported the
100’ no-wake concept with 4 out of 5 sportsmen and fishermen voting in favor. This is
remarkably high result.
The Northwest Wisconsin
Waters Consortium is a coalition of 9 countywide lake associations in northwesternWisconsin. Northwest Waters represents over 30,000 shoreland
owners and many others who enjoy our lakes. Northwest Waters feels this law is
reasonable, long overdue, and will benefit our lakes and all those who enjoy
them.
So how would this law benefit
our citizens?The first thing it offers
is
Protection of people: Children who play near shore, swimmers and fishermen,
kayakers, pets, canoeists and all others who use the waters near shore will be
protected from fast boats and their wakes. Parents and grandparents will
appreciate this legislation.
Boater safety: Many boaters have suffered injury and some have died
because they were traveling fast near shore. This rule will protect them as
well as those who fish, swim or play in the water near shore. This
regulation will save lives.
Protection of plants and
animals: Most wild creatures spend at
least part of their life in the near shore area. Nesting birds and other
creatures are easily driven out by aggressive boating near shore.
Protection of spawning
areas: This rule will protect many
millions of eggs and fry.Sportsmen have told us that they want this
rule.
Less ‘prop wash’: Data shows that the stirring effect of prop wash in
shallow waters brings up nutrients that had settled out, often resulting in
algae blooms and the growth of unwanted aquatic weeds. Prop wash also creates
ideal growing conditions for aquatic invasive species such as Eurasian
Watermilfoil.
Less erosion: This rule will go a long way in protecting shoreline
from erosion, a major problem on many lakes. Eroded soil adds unwanted
nutrients to the water, reduces clarity and can impact property values.
Reduced noise pollution in
the near shore area: Surveys show
that one of the most desirable qualities about lakes is the peace and quiet.
Prohibiting fast boating near shore will help maintain the serenity and beauty of
our lakes.
Compliance with the Public
Trust Doctrine: This law does not
deny boaters access to the near shore area if they are willing to slow down.
This law would help preserve plants and animals in the littoral zone. Scenic
beauty, which is also considered within the Wisconsin Public Trust Doctrine, would be
protected for all.
Let’s look at boating safety
again. It won’t be long before the ice is out and boaters across Wisconsin will be out for their first cruise around the lake. In April, 2000, three young couples were out for their first boat ride of the season. They were
cruising around LakeNepco, near Wisconsin
Rapids. Gina Winters, wife
of the driver, was knocked out of the boat by a tree limb. Her husband turned
the boat around but it was too late. They couldn't find her. The WoodCounty authorities found her body three days later. (See
press clipping on Boating Accident page on this website.) That boat was legally traveling about 25 to 30 mph, just 25
feet from shore, according to the Wood County Sheriff. We can only imagine the
grief felt by family and friends. Future similar tragedies could be avoided
with this new rule. This law will save lives!
Bill Engfer was the DNR
boating law administrator when the 200 foot buffer for PWCs went into effect.
At that time he wrote in a DNR press item: “The closer you are to shore, the
more congested the waters are with other boats and swimmers, and the greater your
likelihood is of having a near-miss or an accident.” “We’ve got a growing
number of boaters out on the waters, but everybody seems to like to stay in
close to shore. By moving out farther into the lake, you get away from the
congestion and have more room to maneuver safely.”
In the documents I have
provided you today are several quotes from a report by DNR Limnologist Tim
Asplund who will testify in support of this bill today. One of those quotes is “Given
that most impacts of boats are exhibited in shallow water, near-shore areas, protecting
these areas with no wake zones would be the most effective way of reducing
impacts.” (From Impacts of Motorized Watercraft on the LakeEnvironment, Tim Asplund, WDNR Limnologist)
Before I close I would like
to mention that Marc Schultz, chair of the Wisconsin Conservation Congress
Waterfowl Committee phoned me last year with his concern that this law would
create a hardship for many of the lakes that are created by the Mississippi River. His concern was that duck hunters need to get to
their blinds quickly, often in the dark, early morning hours. When I mentioned
the opt-out provision, he felt that would resolve his committee’s concern. He
called me again this year. His committee now feels that because there are so
many ‘Mississippi’ lakes affected, it would be best if the language of
this bill would specify that the Mississippi lakes are exempted. My personal opinion is that this
would be acceptable and would save the many local governments along the Mississippi from handling the exclusions on a one-by-one basis.
In closing, Ole Evinrude gave
us a great gift when he invented the outboard motor. But I wonder what Ole
would have to say if he saw a boat with a 200 horsepower motor bearing his name
zipping around a 59 acre lake like Wiley Lake. I’m guessing he would tell the fella driving the
boat to stay out toward the middle.
I firmly believe this law is
long overdue. I can’t think of even one good reason to go fast near
shore but there are many, many reasons not to. A 100 foot-from-shore no-wake
buffer will be healthier for lakes and safer for all who use them. Thank you
for helping us help our lakes.
Jim Brakken
THE BILL:
AN ACT to amend 30.66 (3)
(a), 30.66 (3) (b) and 30.69 (3) (d); and to create 30.66
(3) (ag), 30.66 (3) (ar) and 30.66 (3) (c) of the statutes;relating to: the operation
of motorboats, other than personal watercraft, at
slow.no.wake speed within
a given distance of the shoreline of a lake.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
Under current law, no person may operate a motorboat in
excess of slow.no.
wake speed within 100 feet of buoyed restricted areas or
structures such as piers.
Current law defines “motorboat” to include personal
watercraft. Current law
imposes an additional slow.no.wake restriction on the
operation of personal
watercraft by prohibiting operation within 200 feet of the
shoreline of a lake. Under
current law, there is no slow.no.wake restriction for other
motorboats within a given
distance of a shoreline. This bill imposes a slow.no.wake restriction of 100 feet
from
the shoreline for
motorboats that are not personal watercraft.
Under current law, cities, town, villages, public inland
lake protection and
rehabilitation districts, and town sanitary districts
(local governmental units) may
enact local boating ordinances but the ordinances may not
be inconsistent with state
law.
The bill provides an exception from this general requirement by allowing a
local
governmental unit to
enact an ordinance exempting motorboats from the 100.foot
restriction created
in this bill.
Current law exempts
from these restrictions pickup and drop areas for personal
watercraft and
motorboats and persons involved in water skiing. These exemptions
apply to this new
provision.
2 . 2007 . 2008 Legislature LRB.3033/1
MGG:bjk&kjf:pg
BILL
For further information see the state and local fiscal
estimate, which will be
printed as an appendix to this bill.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
SECTION 1.30.66 (3) (a) of the statutes is amended
to read:
30.66 (3) PROHIBITED OPERATION. (a) Except
under s. 30.69 (3), no No person
may operate a motorboat within 100 feet of any dock, raft,
pier, or buoyed restricted
area on any lake at a speed in excess of slow.no.wake
speed.
SECTION 2.30.66 (3) (ag) of the statutes is created
to read:
30.66 (3) (ag) 1. Except as provided in subd. 2., no
person may operate a
motorboat, other than a personal watercraft, at a speed in
excess of slow.no.wake
within 100 feet of the shoreline of any lake.
2. In its ordinances enacted under s. 30.77, a city,
village, town, public inland
lake protection and rehabilitation district, or a sanitary
district may provide that the
prohibition in subd 1. does not apply.
SECTION 3.30.66 (3) (ar) of the statutes is created
to read:
30.66 (3) (ar) No person may operate a personal
watercraft at a speed in excess
of slow.no.wake within 200 feet of the shoreline of any
lake.
SECTION 4.30.66 (3) (b) of the statutes is amended
to read:
30.66 (3) (b) No person may operate a personal
watercraft at a speed in excess
of slow.no.wake within 100 feet of any other boat or within
200 feet of the shoreline
of any lake. This paragraph does not apply if s. 30.69 (3)
(a), (c) or (d) applies to the
operation of the personal watercraft.
SECTION 5.30.66 (3) (c) of the statutes is created
to read:
3 . 2007 . 2008 Legislature LRB.3033/1
MGG:bjk&kjf:pg
SECTION 5
BILL
30.66 (3) (c) Paragraphs (a) and (b) do not apply to
pickup or drop areas that
are marked with regulatory markers and that are open to operators
of personal
watercraft and to persons and motorboats engaged in water
skiing or similar activity.
SECTION 6.30.69 (3) (d) of the statutes is amended
to read:
30.69 (3) (d) Paragraphs (a) to (c) do not apply to
pickup or drop areas that are
marked with regulatory markers and that are open to
operators of personal
watercraft and to persons and motorboats engaged in water
skiing or similar activity.
SECTION 7.0 Effective
date.
(1) This act takes effect on the first day of the 7th month
beginning after
publication.
(END)
How to opt up or down from the 100 foot buffer rule
Beginning in the 2010 boating
season, all boaters are required by law to go slow when near shore. Some
lakes may need a distance from shore no-wake limit that differs from the new
100 foot requirement. To address this concern, an opt-out provision was
included when the 100’ from shore no-wake law was written. It allows local
governments to make exceptions. These exceptions can either increase or
decrease the distance from shore a boat may travel at high speed. BCLF STRONGLY RECOMMENDS THAT ALL LAKES SEEK A GREATER BUFFER. A 200 FOOT BUFFER WOULD MATCH THE REQUIREMENT FOR PWCs AND MAKE OUR LAKES MUCH SAFER AND HEALTHIER.
To opt up or down, first petition your town board or municipal government to seek
an exception. (Your local lake association or sportsmen’s club can ask for
this, although any individual may also make the request.)
If your request appears on
the upcoming agenda, the officials may choose to hold a public hearing on the
issue. This hearing must be noticed in advance per state regulations.Information at the public hearing will be recorded and used to help make the
decision. After the hearing, usually at the next town board or city council
meeting, the officials may choose to make the change. If so, their decision,
upon approval of the DNR, will likely go into effect. (The DNR will look for
obvious exceptional conditions that conflict with the change. If none are
found, it is very likely that the DNR will approve.)
Once approved by both the
local government and the DNR, both will arrange to publicize the new regulation
and post signs. Marker buoys may need to be ordered and placed, unless the new
regulation affects the entire lake. The new rule may take place immediately or
at a time recommended by DNR or the local government. Because of the increased liability created
when a town chooses to decrease or eliminate the 100 foot from shore no-wake
buffer, there may be insurance riders needed. Consult your town board for
information.
Considering that this process
takes time, it may be practical to begin this action at the earliest possible
opportunity. For more information on the ‘SafeLakes’ bill, see other pages on BayfieldCountyLakes.org.