Residents press Bonner County for no-wake buoys; advisory committee asks director to review denials

Residents from several Pend Oreille River inlets told the Bonner County Waterways Advisory Committee on Wednesday that repeated high-speed boat traffic is creating unsafe conditions and accelerating shoreline erosion, and asked the county to install no-wake buoys where previous permit requests were denied.

The appeals focused on three clusters of requests: two inlets accessed from FEMA Drive (referred to in testimony as “Famous Shores” and an upper inlet), a narrow inlet known locally as Coqualala Creek, and a high-traffic bend around Gypsy Bay and the railroad trestle near Dover. Committee members heard minutes of complaints, photographic and video examples, and personal testimony that boaters are frequently operating at speeds that produce damaging wakes.

Why it matters: Petitioners said the wakes threaten swimmers, paddleboarders and riprap-protected shorelines and that visible buoys would make existing no-wake rules easier to obey and enforce. The marine lieutenant and committee members said buoys also affect traffic flow and maintenance workload, so the county must apply consistent criteria when deciding where to place markers.

Residents recounted repeated incidents. Roberta Bagley, who said she lives on FEMA Drive, told the committee, “They do not adhere to a no wake zone at all,” and said shoreline loss and safety concerns have increased as more full-time residents and tournament fishermen use the inlets. Scott Ralph, who identified his property as the point at the entrance to one inlet, said his dock is “the first dock you're gonna see, and we are constantly yelling at people.”

Lieutenant McGeachie, the sheriff’s marine lieutenant, said enforcement resources are limited and that his review of calls for service did not show a long record of complaints for some of the contested locations. “In the six and a half years that I've been here, I'm not aware of any complaints that we've received about that area,” he said. He added that deputies regularly try to educate boaters and that the county issues warnings and letters when violations are reported.

Petitioners and a long-serving committee member, Ray Pappella, disputed that the applications did not meet the county’s own criteria. Pappella said a subcommittee previously wrote guidance identifying channels less than 400 feet wide that “reasonably can accommodate a boat on a plane” as sites that should receive regulatory buoys. Committee members and staff discussed whether a narrow inlet should be treated as a “channel” under that guidance.

Committee discussion emphasized two recurring issues: whether the contested inlets meet the county’s published criteria (for example, the 400-foot guideline) and whether existing buoys at Gypsy Bay are placed in locations that unintentionally draw traffic toward congested shorelines. A committee member noted maintenance and staffing implications for adding buoys and that buoys are paid for from the county’s motorboat registration fund.

No formal committee vote was taken to reverse denials. Instead, the committee chair and staff said the director would review the appeals and meet with a liaison commissioner, with a commitment to provide an update within roughly 60 days. Matt, the county waterways director, said he would take notes from the meeting, consult with the sheriff’s marine lieutenant and the liaison commissioner, and report back. Commissioner Williams and several advisory members recorded their opinions on the record urging reconsideration of specific sites.

Several residents offered additional evidence and local solutions: one resident said he maintains continuous camera monitoring of his shoreline and offered footage if the county requested enforcement evidence; others offered to help fund buoys privately if that would speed placement.

Background and next steps: Bonner County’s written criteria for buoy placement were developed through a multi-agency subcommittee that involved county staff and Idaho Department of Lands representatives. The county’s current administrative process routes applications to the waterways director and allows petitioners to present information in a public meeting; the director makes the administrative decision and — if he chooses — may change a denial and submit required paperwork to the Idaho Department of Lands to obtain permits. Several committee members asked the board to clarify or codify a formal appeal path going to the board of county commissioners; staff said that change would require a separate process review.

The committee recorded that the director would review the three contested applications and aim to provide an answer to petitioners within 60 calendar days. If the director decides to change a denial, county staff said it would take approximately two months to complete permitting steps with Idaho Department of Lands and have a buoy in the water for a subsequent boating season.

Provenance: The discussion of no-wake buoy appeals began in committee remarks introducing “new buoy request” and continued through the public testimony and staff responses. Key transcript excerpts supporting this account include the director’s announcement of the buoy agenda item and multiple public-comment statements from residents; the committee’s direction to review the denials and return with an update is recorded near the meeting’s close.

Ending: Residents and committee members agreed the issue is likely to recur as shoreline development and recreational boat traffic increase; petitioners said they would follow up with the director’s office and supply photographic evidence where available.