Sierra club environmental impact study, midlake gas & ******* wake boat drivers - none are good

I live in Mesa AZ just down the road from Saguaro Lake and Canyon Lake. Both have implemented what is basically a wake boat area. The back half of Saguaro is no wake so no jet skis and no wake boats, at least none at speed.
Canyon Lake took it one step further and implemented the back half as a no tow zone. You can still go fast but you can't tow anything. It works out GREAT for everyone involved. I'm a fisherman and I also jet ski at least once a week.
 
Powelldreamer said:
As to the wake boat equation here, I might suggest the following: Since we now have couple "wakeless canyons" for those that kayak and the like, why not have a designated wake boat area. The wake boaters still have a place to enjoy their chosen recreation, those that do not appreciate that recreation are not subjected to it unless by choice. I think the lake is big enough for us all to get along in this massive water/sand box.
Click to expand...
This is a fantastic idea. Without giving it a lot of thought. I think we should designate all of Warm Creek for wake boating. It’s relatively close to the marinas in that area. It’s isolated. The mouth is closed off so the wakes won’t really emanate out of it. It’s large, plenty of room for lots of wake boats. I really like this idea.
 
The wakeless rule for Antelope canyon has ruined the canyon for us. The kayak people are now pooping up in the canyon and littering, more than any boats ever did. I wont even go up there anymore. You give any group a big advantage and they will find a way to create a new problem. Antelope is now the kayak destination and they have their own issues.

Rarely does a law that benefits one group help the overall issue. Many problems cant be solved with laws and rules. The idiots don't follow the rules or laws anyway.

Education is the only way to help these issues. Not sure the best way to educate. Even the wake surf issue would be much better with more education. Many boaters creating damaging waves dont even know they are causing is an issue.

And I agree Sierra Club is not the lakes friend. They only know how to take things away from people.

Mike
 
It's hard not to get upset reading through some of these comments. I believe that we do not need any more laws put in place that tell me what I can and can't do at the Lake. We could do a better job at implementing the laws that are already in place.

We all love the lake, and the experiences that come with each visit. Some have recommended banning surf boats, how is that fair to those that use them responsibly? Why should I be penalized for someone's actions when I take every step to treat other boaters with respect. There is already a law for operating above a wakeless speed around another vessel, and it even spells out that the boat driver is responsible for his wake damage.

In this thread, people have recommended a few things:
  • Speed limits on surf boats - These boats are designed to create the biggest wave at 10-12 MPH, a 25 MPH speed limit won't help.
  • Designated Wake Boat Area - The goal of most watersports is to find a calm, glassy area. A designated area would constantly have traffic and waves, not ideal conditions for any watersport (Except maybe tubing). The lake is large enough to do this respectfully without needing a designated wake boat area.
  • Wakeless canyons - Powell has a few wakeless canyons... if you hate waves that much, you camp/fish in those to find your peace and serenity. (Oh... you don't want to me limited to those areas? That's why a designated wake boat area will never work on Powell... Imagine showing up to the lake with your boat and being told that you can't use it to see rainbow bridge and that you are limited to use it in Padre Bay, to me that seems unamerican. )
Then there is the cherry on top... Wakeboats will never get banned because that would cause a huge economic hit on the lake. 75%+ of the boats that I see are wakeboats, and that's their only boat.
 
I'm not suggesting banning wake boats but I wish both of the posters above would visit Saguaro Lake and Canyon Lake and see how well that system is working. Both lakes have good water for everyone. The back half is basically for fishing, the front half is skiing. You can still take the wakeboats anywhere any other boat can go, just no towing a wake boarder or skier in the fishing areas. I'm in total agreement with limiting certain types of recreation to certain areas. They do it all the time with dirt bikes, 4 wheelers and side by sides.
Trying to make an argument that certain types of boats should be able to do anything they want, anywhere they want while other types of boats should just find whatever they can is just ludicrous.
It's the reason some folks on here have an issue with that "me first" attitude.
Fisherman like calm water as well and for the most part, don't hardly contribute to the wake problem anywhere close to what wake boats do.
It's everybody's lake, even the kayakers have every right to use these waters. Im lost in the argument that kayakers or the no wake rule ruined Antelope Canyon. I fish in the and love that it's a no wake area. I can't imagine even one wake boat in that tiny canyon. Their wake would be bouncing around for hours and ruining everybody else's enjoyment just for one quick wakeboard ride.
It's selfish and frankly, rude.
 
Last edited:
Powelldreamer said:
As to the wake boat equation here, I might suggest the following: Since we now have couple "wakeless canyons" for those that kayak and the like, why not have a designated wake boat area. The wake boaters still have a place to enjoy their chosen recreation, those that do not appreciate that recreation are not subjected to it unless by choice. I think the lake is big enough for us all to get along in this massive water/sand box.
Click to expand...
This is a fantastic idea. Without giving it a lot of thought. I think we should designate all of Warm Creek for wake boating. It’s relatively close to the marinas in that area. It’s isolated. The mouth is closed off so the w won’t really emanate out of it. I really like this idea.
Line said:
It's hard not to get upset reading through some of these comments. I believe that we do not need any more laws put in place that tell me what I can and can't do at the Lake. We could do a better job at implementing the laws that are already in place.

We all love the lake, and the experiences that come with each visit. Some have recommended banning surf boats, how is that fair to those that use them responsibly? Why should I be penalized for someone's actions when I take every step to treat other boaters with respect. There is already a law for operating above a wakeless speed around another vessel, and it even spells out that the boat driver is responsible for his wake damage.

In this thread, people have recommended a few things:
  • Speed limits on surf boats - These boats are designed to create the biggest wave at 10-12 MPH, a 25 MPH speed limit won't help.
  • Designated Wake Boat Area - The goal of most watersports is to find a calm, glassy area. A designated area would constantly have traffic and waves, not ideal conditions for any watersport (Except maybe tubing). The lake is large enough to do this respectfully without needing a designated wake boat area.
  • Wakeless canyons - Powell has a few wakeless canyons... if you hate waves that much, you camp/fish in those to find your peace and serenity. (Oh... you don't want to me limited to those areas? That's why a designated wake boat area will never work on Powell... Imagine showing up to the lake with your boat and being told that you can't use it to see rainbow bridge and that you are limited to use it in Padre Bay, to me that seems unamerican. )
Then there is the cherry on top... Wakeboats will never get banned because that would cause a huge economic hit on the lake. 75%+ of the boats that I see are wakeboats, and that's their only boat.
Click to expand...
While I agree with you that “most watersport“ boats are looking for glass that is not necessarily the case with wake boats. A wake boat is intentionally creating a large wake and can cut through other boats wakes without really disrupting their own wake so it’s no big deal. Glass is not required or even a thing when you’re surfing.

And I don’t care where they go as long as they’re not going 10 miles an hour with a surfer behind them.
 
Before the No wake in Antelope there was only a few kayaks going up there. Mostly because it was a much more difficult bumpy ride when wave runners and boats were making waves.

Now that it’s no wake it’s become a kayak haven and 5-10x the amount of kayaks. With the extra kayak traffic there is lots more garbage and they get up there and have to poo. So they do and it’s an issue.

Just telling you the last couple times I went up there it was not good. Wasn’t like that when it was open to boats making waves.

Maybe they were still pooping up there but the waves cleaned it up more. Haha. I don’t know.

My point is making a new law in that canyon didn’t help anything and created a new problem. Which is how many new laws are.

Mike
 
We go up to mid lake, and have almost no issues with wake boats or other users. Mostly I think because the people up that far are paying better attention, and there is lots of space. The channel from below Oak all the way to the confluence is excellent for water sports, and we usually have it to ourselves. Last trip We did have a surf boat towing two tubes roll into the back of Music Temple dragging 3’ waves and beat up our boat some. Why on an empty lake they needed to hang out right beside us is a different question.
 
To be clear, I have no problem with wake boats. I DO have an issue with the operators. Which most of the time and a significant number of them do not think about how they affect those around them. It would be a nonissue for me if MOST of these operators would be courteous and not decide that doing their chosen form of recreation 50 feet behind everyone else's recreation spot was being a responsible lake user. The issue and suggestion comes from the lack of considering how their actions impact others. That IS the basis of regulation in a civil society. I agree that education would be preferred. It has been my experience that these operators in general do not display any kind of maturity in making a courteous decision. This is not to say that there are not those that are courteous. I have seen them just about every blue moon.(toungue in cheek) It is like everything else a few irresponsible people ruin things for the masses. Until as a group that segment of the boating public that choose to recreate in a way, that many take issue with, there will be and should be a call for limiting that which causes issue with the general public. I wish it were not so.
 
Michael Pyle said:
The wakeless rule for Antelope canyon has ruined the canyon for us. The kayak people are now pooping up in the canyon and littering, more than any boats ever did. I wont even go up there anymore. You give any group a big advantage and they will find a way to create a new problem. Antelope is now the kayak destination and they have their own issues.

Rarely does a law that benefits one group help the overall issue. Many problems cant be solved with laws and rules. The idiots don't follow the rules or laws anyway.

Education is the only way to help these issues. Not sure the best way to educate. Even the wake surf issue would be much better with more education. Many boaters creating damaging waves dont even know they are causing is an issue.

And I agree Sierra Club is not the lakes friend. They only know how to take things away from people.

Mike
Click to expand...
The wakeless rule did not ruin the canyon for you. It's the people that use the canyon that ruined it for you. In my opinion there is a big difference.
 
Just got back from the lake, was there for a week out of Bullfrog. It is never the vessel, it’s always the operator. We had idiot operators on bay-liners, bass boats, wake boats, pontoon boats, cigarette boats, barge boat, float plane, houseboats, jet skis, you name it. We also witnessed amazing people on bay liners, bass boats, wake boats, pontoon boats, cigarette boats, houseboats, jet skis. More rules or certain areas for anything can’t fix stupid. The only one that was a constant idiot was the one flying his float plane 25 feet off the deck and buzzing houseboats and boats like maverick buzzing the tower in top gun. How is that legal and I can’t fly a drone???
 
thekid26 said:
Just got back from the lake, was there for a week out of Bullfrog. It is never the vessel, it’s always the operator. We had idiot operators on bay-liners, bass boats, wake boats, pontoon boats, cigarette boats, barge boat, float plane, houseboats, jet skis, you name it. We also witnessed amazing people on bay liners, bass boats, wake boats, pontoon boats, cigarette boats, houseboats, jet skis. More rules or certain areas for anything can’t fix stupid. The only one that was a constant idiot was the one flying his float plane 25 feet off the deck and buzzing houseboats and boats like maverick buzzing the tower in top gun. How is that legal and I can’t fly a drone???
Click to expand...
It is definitely not legal...

Federal Aviation Regulations 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
 
thekid26 said:
...The only one that was a constant idiot was the one flying his float plane 25 feet off the deck and buzzing houseboats and boats like maverick buzzing the tower in top gun. How is that legal and I can’t fly a drone???
Click to expand...
Did nobody shoot any video? A long shot showing his altitude above the boats and a close up showing his registration numbers, and his shenanigans would be over for a while...

Post that video to social media like Facebook or YouTube and sit back. The FAA would be all over that.
 
CSU376 said:
It is definitely not legal...

Federal Aviation Regulations 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
Click to expand...
class G regs. Pretty cut and dry.
 
The pilots breaking regs is unbelievable to me. How dumb and risky. You can lose your pilots license and or cause real harm to innocent people.

I am a pilot and have zero respect for pilots that do that. It’s all fun and games until something goes wrong and you kill someone that didn’t sign up for your games.

For sure get video if you ever see a plane buzzing people.

Mike
 
flathatting is unbelievably risky, but we all have that
little daredevil in us. as mentioned, the faa does not take
this behavior lightly. history is loaded w/pilot caused mishaps where
the pilot’s personality, even for just a few seconds, is “i know
what the rules are, but……..”, or “hey everyone, look at me”.
but i surely enjoy seeing military fighter jets on their low level routes.
agree totally w/mp.
 
Ed_on_WD said:
Did nobody shoot any video? A long shot showing his altitude above the boats and a close up showing his registration numbers, and his shenanigans would be over for a while...

Post that video to social media like Facebook or YouTube and sit back. The FAA would be all over that.
Click to expand...
i'll check, it happened two days in a row and honestly we all thought it must be legal because how would the rangers or whoever not be busting this guy. He was flying over halls and bullfrog at 50-100 feet, buzzing houseboats and boats also at 50-100 feet.
 
Line said:
Designated Wake Boat Area - The goal of most watersports is to find a calm, glassy area. A designated area would constantly have traffic and waves, not ideal conditions for any watersport (Except maybe tubing). The lake is large enough to do this respectfully without needing a designated wake boat area.
Click to expand...
I’m in agreement with most of your comments but I hope you can see the irony of this comment. “The goal is to find a calm glass area “ that the boat and related surfing activities, by their very design, will then create huge waves that don’t dissipate quickly; destroying the calm glassy water? Seems a bit of an oxymoron to me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top