Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Residents, board press DNR for more study on wake‑surfing impacts and enforcement
Loading...
Summary
Public commenters urged the Natural Resources Board and Department of Natural Resources to take stronger action on wake‑surfing boats, citing aquatic‑vegetation loss, phosphorus disturbance and invasive‑species transfer. The board asked staff to schedule an informational briefing for the June meeting to clarify enforcement and policy options.
Madison and Presque Isle residents called on the Natural Resources Board and Department of Natural Resources on May 28 to address environmental and enforcement concerns tied to wake‑surfing boats, and board members agreed to pursue a public briefing on the issue in June.
The public commenters said wake‑surfing boats’ ballast systems and propwash damage submerged vegetation and stir up phosphorus. Jim Olsen, a Madison petitioner, told the board that industry drone studies and local observations “show propwash from wake surfing boats extends at least 26 feet below the surface” and that in Lake Beulah “vegetation beyond 20 feet deep has been destroyed.” Richard Phillips of Presque Isle said local governments are responding: “As of today, 53 Wisconsin towns … have established ordinances regulating wake surfing on their lakes.”
Jeff Meeseman, appearing virtually, described ballast system practices he said contradict state drainage rules and create risks of moving aquatic invasive species between lakes. Meeseman read manufacturer guidance noting ballast pumps can damage themselves unless left operational and recommending flushing with hot water or antifreeze; he told the board these practices make compliance with NR 19 and NR 40 difficult using existing landing‑side infrastructure.
Board members responded that they want factual, operational briefings before considering rule changes. Chair Bill Smith and several board members, including Rachel and Robin, urged staff to bring law enforcement and technical experts to explain enforcement constraints and options. “We need more information,” Doug said, citing enforcement and technical questions; Robin and Rachel agreed that a public informational item would also help nonconsumptive user groups and municipalities weigh in.
Department staff said they have compiled materials and offered to present them. Secretary Karen Yoon told the board staff would look at the June agenda for room to schedule an informational session. The board did not adopt any rules or motions on wake surfing at the May meeting; instead members directed staff to prepare a public briefing and invited community groups, law enforcement, and industry representatives to participate.
The public has already pursued local ordinances, and speakers noted at least one lawsuit has been filed challenging a town ordinance. Several board members said they expect the informational item to include: law enforcement perspectives on enforceability, technical explanations of ballast systems and propwash, habitat and water‑quality impacts, and options for state‑ or local‑level responses.
The board’s decision to request a June briefing leaves open whether the department will recommend rulemaking, temporary emergency action, or other steps. Members said they expect the June discussion to be public and urged commenters and stakeholders to submit written materials before that meeting.
