As Hazelnut pointed out this came out of no where and wasn't publized to get everyone's opinion. It seems like it was done behind the scenes to keep it quiet.
I can not speak for SBONH. A meeting would have to be held to get everyone's input. I wish this had been brought up earlier to have time to get a consensus.
As mentioned before there are a variety of problems on both sides. From what I can gather so far.
1. it would possibly increase traffic elsewhere (little bear passage) which could lead to another NWZ seperating the lake.
2. it may have a negative impact on property values
3. it may only be necessary for weekends when traffic is up.
4. it actually may increase large wakes for certain property owners because all boats would be slowing and speeding up at one particular area, rather then spread out across the pole if people are abiding by the safe passage law.
5. Depending on the size it may be a hinderance to nearby by camps who pull skiers during the week.
6. It may be safer to have one but we need to discuss and study the issue further.
7. Is the no wake zone necessary or could it be solved by enforcment of current laws?
As you can see it is very difficult to make a decision based on the discussions here. I would be in favor of pushing the vote and having a more public "Publizied" hearing where more of all those effected as well as all boaters can voice their opinions. We have to look at this from all angles, not just from a few property owners that want to decrease wakes.
__________________
Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?
|