New Wakeless Zones in 3 Lake Powell Side Canyons

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roscoelab,

I agree its amazing how often I see people speeding thru the cut or in other no wake areas. On one hand its odd that you never see any Law enforcement but in a way I like it that way LOL.

I think they need to spend more on education. I think all of the people breaking the rules simply do not know the rules and would be horrified if they knew they were breaking them.

If it were up to me I would put some signs up at launch ramps that show in a map of no wake zones and some other areas to watch. Or have some brochure type handouts that have some important info.

I believe for the most part people are good and want to follow the rules. Education should be the first step.

I had a friend of a friend go thru the cut on plane. I asked him about it and he said there was nobody there and it was off season. I explained that its not there just for safety but its there to stop erosion of the cut walls. He had never thought about that and felt stupid. If there are a lot of wakes in the cut eventually the walls will fall and fill in the cut.

Mike
 
I was coming in to DR last year and somebody that obviously didn't know how to boat came flying by me between my boat and shore trying to get ahead before the wakeless zone. I ended up throttling down because he was going to hit a whale he did not see. At the last second he veered over at me as he saw it and I am not sure how but he missed it. I was going 28 so I would guess he was at least 40 mph. One or both of us would have had an issue had I not given way to an overtaking boat. I was pretty angry but moved on, however when he pulled up across the dock from me I just hit the limit and went and talked to a ranger standing on the dock. I told him what happened and pointed to the driver who popped open a beer in the drivers seat in front of us and started drinking it. The ranger followed him out after he pulled out and I did not see him again, I am hoping he got a serious talking to but I never did find out. Those times when a ranger is around in a situation like thatare few and far between. I am not in favor of more enforcement because I come to the lake for solitude and don't need a safety check every day in GHB minding my own business. Lately I have taken to pulling out my cell phone and recording if someone is being really stupid. I have yet to file a complaint however it is nice to have infractions like getting run over on video. I tend not to confront idiots because you never know who you are talking to and how crazy or well armed they are and usually those conversations are not friendly ones no matter how hard you try. (That being said I did plant a fly in the chest of a jet skier at 100 ft away after his third high speed run by me, literally soaking me the second time around). There are a ton of canyons at the lake so I guess I don't have any heartache with a few that are wakeless. I would hope it stays a few however. As waterbaby said, the tour boats are rough and don't recognize the chaos they create so maybe this will help in antelope. Everyone has a right to enjoy the lake as they see fit, from kayakers to wakeboarders, provided it is in a safe manor and does not endanger others.

TR
 
To go along with the majority of this conversation, any added regulations will only affect the people who follow rules. You will follow the new regs and I will follow them but those who don't care about anyone but themselves won't follow the regs. Adding new regs without added enforcement, will only frustrate the people who follow these regs when the next person flies by and sends wakes bouncing off the walls. I will be cussing them for being discourteous like I do now as well as cussing them for not following the new regs. New regs and rules will only affect the people who already follow the current expectations.
 
Right now everyone who makes a wake hides behind the 150 foot rule and this is a complete joke and is an example of where a dated but needed safety related law has not caught up with changing trends and technology. A 150 foot rule works with low wake boats like 60's era flat bottom Mastercraft ski boats, jet skis and and high speed bass boats, but does not come close to safely managing the impact zone of a late model 12 passenger wake boat with 5000 pounds of ballast bags and wake maker drag wings. In just a few years there will be 8-10 foot wakes on the lake and this packs a lot of energy that rolls a great distance and impacts anything in its path with great shock and great silent force.

Lake Powell needs a better law to manage wake rage than the outdated 150 foot rule. A better wake distance law for wake generating boats could be very simple, determined by boat weight or by wake height. IE, for every thousand pounds of boat loaded weight, the wake zone liability would increase by 100 feet, a 6000 pound wake boat would see a Powell amended wake law of 600 feet in all directions, staying at least 600 feet away of camps and pother boats. Or if using wake height, use one hundred fifty feet per foot of wake, so a wake boat when producing a 5 foot wake would stay 750 feet away from camps and other boats. Anyone at the current distance of 150 feet of a modern wake generating boat when that boat is trimmed to full plow at full ballast and loaded with people and making 6 or 7 foot rollers, is in a very very dangerous place, especially if not prepared or expecting the impact. Those big waves don't magically flatten out at 150 feet, they just keep on rolling until they hit a cliff then they bounce back and forth for a long time. A single wake boat in a narrow canyon with a single pass every 30 - 45 minutes will prevent the water from ever calming. Wake generating surf boats have no business plowing in narrow canyons or near camps and this is coming from a surf boat owner.

The park service should be applauded by finally getting out in front of this big and growing problem before someone gets shot or rammed from wake rage. It is clear the NPS has listened to and responded to a large segment of Powell visitors who want to be away from modern wake boat waves and associated dangers, and want to just enjoy safe and calm waters to relax, recreate and camp, and they deserve this, and I am part of this group too. What right do wake boat owners have to create big wakes in narrow canyons and force other boats there and campers there to put up with their dangerous and unpleasant waves all day. As this calm safe haven wakeless canyon demand increases for campers and kayakers, and it will, the places to surf directly decreases. The writing is on the wall and the park service is going to be pressured to increase the calm canyons count. It is going to be a lot easier going from three canyons to ten then it was zero canyons to three. I would like to suggest adding Moki, Iceburg and Hansen to the list.

I encourage the NPS to study the benefit of this new initiative and to consider expanding the safety net to most canyons in high traffic areas at the 1000 foot wide choke point and to also move toward limiting wake generating boats to just the open channel or very large bays when the boat is trimmed in surf configuration or when surfers are on wave. I know this is an unpopular position but something has to be done to regain public safety. The reality is the modern day wake generating boats are a game changer, they are in a league of their own and should be legally viewed and classified separately as a threat to public safety. Bass boat when under full power make a ripple wake like a jet ski or a landing duck with zero wake danger to others, but the slow moving wake generating boat at full ballast with wake wing set for max plow and at rated load or even over rated load with max passengers creates a huge real safety liability issue for anyone nearby, and nearby is a lot farther away than 150 feet.

I am the last one who wants more rules, but this one is for the better. I will camp inside the wakeless canyons, enjoying calm conditions for my family and then take my surf rollers out to the open channel. For me nothing changes, but this forces those with wake generating boats to now respect common courtesy by putting a barrier between their wake and designated calm camp areas.

As a surf boat owner, the NPS has my attention and my full support. But in order for this to be successful the NPs must educate those equipped to do most harm, every wake boat needs a handout on how to be a good neighbor and how and where to enjoy a big wake. This handout should be on the launch Ramps with a verbal reference to the 150 foot rule not really being a solution.


I will look forward to relaxing in one of the new wakeless canyons.
 
Here in Colorado they are finally educating drivers by posting on the traffic signs that the left lane is for passing, I did not know about the 150' rule until I was stopped coming out of Seven Mile canyon when the ranger was going in, that was 20 years ago now, I see no improvement in people following the rules, and have been unfortunate enough to be tied up to a floating restroom when the idiot in the wakeboard boat start using it as a pylon in a race throwing my wife to the deck with his wake, more education is the key, I think most will follow the rules if they know them, there are very few signs or basic instructions posted, the marinas are posting more but little if anything about you being responsible for your wake.
 
The 150' rule works well for most boats that are not a deeper draft boat. The Wave Monster of the Inland Seas & wake boats come to mind as exceptions.

In reality even though the 150' rule is deficient in regards to some vessels, the current law has a caveat to account for people 'hiding behind' the rule. Every vessel is responsible for its wake and liable for any damage it causes regardless of distance. The tour boat is liable for wake damage to another boat even if it is a mile away.

I suppose we could always adjust the rules for deeper draft boats but just how complex and overregulated do you want to become. Wake boats would actually need a variety of distances for safety's sake, perhaps chart requirement to be mandated at the helm and referred to. Other boats would depend on many intricate design features, i.e. gross weight, hull designed, planing effects, is it a hydrofoil?. and on, and on. Perhaps a cottage industry could spring up counseling folks as to the appropriate distance depending on weights & numbers of people, fuel state, cargo or other stores, etc., etc.

The rules are not enforced at present. More rules would not be enforced either and the usual suspects would still ignore them.

Like most rules if you make them more intricate and more complex they will either be more ignored or people will just avoid the activity altogether which may be more to the liking for some.

One should avoid talking like they are the majority. I don't know where or what the majority is. But you should remember one fact:

In order to have Lake Powell exactly the way 'you' want it, you must deprive someone else of having it exactly the way they want it.

It is the same with government subsidies, healthcare (as an entitlement), welfare, or any other redistribution of wealth because the government has no money. In order to give money to someone who did not earn it, the government must first take that money away from somebody that did earn it. I do see a parallel.

Wakeless canyons deprive those that enjoy responsibly zipping through a canyon and reserve them for kayakers & campers even if nobody is there. Doesn't make much since to ban something for all to protect people that may not even be there.

Don't worry I won't Virtue Signal about how responsible I am on the lake blah, blah, blah....
Goblin
 
Last edited:
Two excellent replies on this issue just above. The only way to deal with the outliers, wake boats, which are in a small minority on the lake, but who make a large and dangerous footprint is to understand their purpose. It is not for sight seeing. Wake boats are for a single purpose and that is to create a wave environment for a surfer who only watches the wave, the captain who only watches where the boat is going and the passengers who are watching the surfer. That is a function that can best be managed by setting specific areas for wake surfing rather than slowly removing areas. There is simply no reason for a wake boat in surf mode to be anywhere other than mid bay or in the widest channels of the lake. Enforcement would be much easier if the wakers were in bays where operations can be observed by enforcement. If the waker is sight seeing off-plane, then they should be able to go anywhere they would like. This isn't removing anyone's rights. This is simply assuring that wake boats have a designated place to play where their narrow function can be fully utilized and where no one will bitch at them. Kayakers, fishermen, sight seers, campers etc. will know to stay away from those designated wake areas. There are plenty of other boat classes and operator mayhem for other non-wake go fast boats, but they and their smaller, but still possibly deadly wakes will have to be tolerated by the-- go slow and enjoy the view lake users.
 
wake boats, which are in a small minority on the lake

That may be true right now .... but definately changing .

Been to a boat show lately ? I went this february and other than pontoons or fishing boats , EVERYTHING has ballast tanks any more ..... even Sea rays.

It seems like regular fish and skis or cruisers arent even being made right now. So these types of rules will only get worse as time goes on .
 
Quote: In just a few years there will be 8-10 foot wakes on the lake

IF this is true this is a much larger wave than the tour boats and exceedingly dangerous for houseboaters as well as others on the main body water of the lake - much less in the canyons and 150 feet will be worthless. Remember 150 feet is for the main channel, too. As Goblin stated. We are ALL responsible for our wakes, not just maintaining 150 feet.
 
Last fall I was going uplake through the cut, wakeless. I was hit directly in the stern by a wakeboarding boat at 30 mph, on plane. Did $3400 of damage to my transom and put the boat out of service for a month. He said he didn't see me and had no explanation why he was on plane in a wakeless zone. The NPS came to our slip and looked at the damage, but did not cite the guy because they did not witness the accident! People need to obey the rules, NPS needs to enforce better.
 
I think the back of Labyrinth is a great place for wakeless. I've seen some boats fly through with not enough room for another boat to pass, which can be a recipe for disaster.

We'll always need laws, the key is having laws that help.
 
Jim, you should have taken photos, got names, right there. His boat must also have been damaged. That kind of collision leaves lots of easy evidence for the Park cops to believe your side of the story.
 
Last fall I was going uplake through the cut, wakeless. I was hit directly in the stern by a wakeboarding boat at 30 mph, on plane. Did $3400 of damage to my transom and put the boat out of service for a month. He said he didn't see me and had no explanation why he was on plane in a wakeless zone. The NPS came to our slip and looked at the damage, but did not cite the guy because they did not witness the accident! People need to obey the rules, NPS needs to enforce better.
If you know the identity of the other boater, you don't need a citation to make them liable. Since the damages are less than $10,000, you can just file this in small claims court. I'm pretty sure that the Castle Rock cut is in Kane County. If that's right, you would file with the Kane County Justice Court in Kanab. You might want to check with the court about their power over out of state defendants if the other boater doesn't live in Utah. Again, sorry it happened.
 
We got all of the info. He is from Colorado. The point of impact for him was his bow, right at the eye. The eye is what prevented his boat riding up and ending up in our boat, the eye got hung up on the top of my transom. If this had happened, there would have been injuries to the people sitting in the rear bench seat. Very little damage to his boat, the center of the bow's "V" is one of the strongest places on a boat. Neither boat was taking on water. He fought it all of the way, but his insurance ended up paying. NPS couldn't cite him as they could not verify that he was in the cut. We had plenty of fotos and 4 witnesses who gave statements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top