KENT, Conn.—The three towns surrounding Lake Waramaug—Warren, Washington and Kent—have done their due diligence, researched the impact of wake boats on the body of water, agreed on the wording of an ordinance to ban them, and held public hearings on the issue.
Now, the hotly contested matter goes to a referendum vote in each town on Thursday, July 31. In Kent, the polls will be open from noon to 8 p.m. at town hall, 41 Kent Green Blvd. Absentee ballots are available at the town clerk’s office.
The specially equipped boats are designed to create artificially larger wakes for water sports such as wake boarding and wake surfing. Wake boats often travel between 18 to 24 mph. The height of the wake at this speed can vary, with factors such as the boat’s design, ballast and rope length influencing the wake’s size and shape.
The sport has been increasing in popularity over the past decade on Lake Waramaug, a 657-acre recreation destination. The increased number of wake boaters has stirred consternation among lakeside property owners and others who engage in lower-key water recreation, such as fishing, swimming and kayaking.
Property owners complain of erosion of the shoreline and damage to their docks and seawalls and cite safety factors and environmental concerns for the fragile lake, which was pulled back from the edge of eutrophication through a massive effort in the 1970s.
Data collected by Terra Vigilis Environmental Group, which the three towns retained in 2023 to conduct a three-phase water quality and wave impact study seems to confirm the negative impact of the sport.
But advocates of the water sports say the concerns are being overstated and that banning the boats would limit how people can enjoy the lake. They criticize the accuracy of the Terre Vigilis findings and one advocacy group, Lake Waramaug Friends, suggests the towns create an enhanced-wake activity zone instead of enacting a ban on wake boats.
The zone would limit enhanced-wake activities to an area 200 feet from shore and in water at least 20 feet deep and would mandate that larger surf-side waves be directed toward the middle of the lake, providing 500 feet for them to dissipate before reaching the shoreline,
The ordinance facing the July 31 vote, drafted by the Lake Waramaug Authority, would prohibit use of any vessel while employing one or more ballast tanks, weight-loading, hydrofoils, wake shaper or “any other devices(s) to artificially enhance or increase its wake.”
Under the proposed ordinance, all vessels would be inspected, and the owner or operator would be required to certify in writing that “any ballast tanks in such vessels have been decontaminated” and their vessels won’t be operated to produce “an artificially enhanced wake.”
Each violation would incur a fine of $250.
Recent public hearings in Warren and Washington brought plenty of comments from both sides. Warren, the town with the largest lake holdings, and Washington, both held public hearings on July 17, and Warren’s First Selectman Gregory LaCava said his rough tally showed commentators evenly divided on the issue. In Washington, First Selectman James Brinton said he believes most people had already decided how they would vote and were not swayed by public arguments.
Kent, which has only 15 percent of the lake’s shoreline within its borders—and that largely consumed by the Lake Waramaug State Park—held a relatively mild public hearing in late June and the Selectmen were blindsided when they took the issue to a town meeting on July 11 that drew a crowd far larger than could be accommodated in town hall. With that meeting necessarily suspended, the three towns then decided to have referendum votes on the same day.
The intense debate has continued online and on the streets ever since. Signs supporting both sides of the issue have been posted around town (possibly causing the large voter turnout in June) and the Kent Community Facebook Page has been full of comments urging votes for and against the ban.
A group post on the community page exhorts townspeople to “VOTE NO,” asserting, “We all love and want to protect Lake Waramaug, but a small group is distorting the facts to ban something they don’t like.”
The group contends “reasonable, science-backed restrictions” would keep the lake “safe and fun without unnecessarily infringing on individual rights.” It further asserts that there are no studies or measurement showing that wake surfing is harming the lake and that studies prove that wake surfing in deeper water and further from shore eliminates potential impact on shorelines and lake beds.
“A single, flawed study is used to back up this ban on wake surfing, and it didn’t even try to measure the actual impact of wake boats on Lake Waramaug,” the group states. The statement further asserts that the lake’s water is “healthier than it has been in the last half century.” Other testimony indicates water quality has decreased in recent years.
As wake surfing has only happened on the lake within the past 10 years, the group concluded, “Wake surfing is insignificant to the lake’s water quality compared to other environmental impacts such as wind, weather, sedimentation, nutrient loading, runoff and erosion.”
The group contends that a community survey revealed boaters spend only two percent of their time wake surfing. Thus, they assert, any one spot on the lake’s shoreline would see waves from these boats less than one percent of the year, representing a much lesser danger than droppings from Canada geese, extreme weather that affects phosphorus and water clarity, farm runoff and chemicals.
But Kent resident Jim Hicks, a veteran user of the lake’s waters who has reported that his smaller vessel has been overturned several times by the enhanced wakes, responded, “This document is so filled with inaccuracies that it is hardly worth commenting on. It’s from a small minority of boat owners trying to protect their ill-considered investment, and [who] are not above tearing down signs, screaming at our elected town officials, threatening them with lawsuits and insulting you with garbage about a “slippery slope” that will ban fishing boats next (a ban on wake surfing will make Lake Waramaug decidedly more welcoming to ALL vessels, swimmers and people who like just ‘sittin’ on the dock of the bay’).”
Hicks contends that “the artificial creation of large waves … is not just environmentally irresponsible and dangerous to and disrespectful of all other lake users but represents to me an unseemly blend of perceived entitlement, conspicuous consumption and willful negligence.”
He urged readers to do their own homework and then vote yes for the ban.
Kasey Leo Straiton joined Hicks in advocating for a ban that is “a necessary, well-crafted, well-informed and focused action that represents cooperative local government at its most effective.”
But Pamela Goethner argued that, while the lake needs proper patrolling “by an authority that knows boating rules and regulations,” it is not just wake boating that is at issue. “Skiing without a spotter, lack of yielding to right of way, skiing into the no-wake zone, not maintaining safe distance, are all safety issues on the lake that have nothing to do with the sport of wake surfing,” she wrote. “… It’s a Connecticut state lake that allows water sports. Just as other sports and activities evolve, wake surfing is a sport that is more inclusive of people of all abilities. Let’s not take that opportunity away but work together to find a solution to manage other environmental threats to the lake.”
Dan Thomas posted that Waramaug is too small for wake surfing. He noted that in his native Wisconsin, more than 300 lakes have banned wake surfing as being detrimental to both other recreational users and the lakes. He cited one article that said a lake should have at least 1,500 acres before wake boating is allowed.
In Western Connecticut, there are other nearby opportunities for wake boats to take to the water. In New Milford, Lakeside Watersports offers wakeboard lessons for all skill levels on Candlewood Lake, as does Connecticut Watersports on Lake Lillinoah. Lake Candlewood, the largest lake in the state, has 5,420 acres, while Lake Lillinonah, the second largest, has 1,547 acres.
Good, balanced article – thanks. I appreciate the digital Kent Dispatch.