Pool 4 no-wake zone

  • brad0383
    Farmington, MN
    Posts: 354
    November 22, 2009 at 4:16 pm #1315595

    I just heard that the DNR is trying to get a no wake zone from Bay Point all the way to the dam. Anyone else heard this? This is ridiculous!

    jerry b
    western WI
    Posts: 1506
    November 22, 2009 at 4:26 pm #817615

    I heard it was the property owners. They’re claiming bank erosion. That’s about as far as I’m going with this one jerr

    Jesse Krook
    Y.M.H.
    Posts: 6403
    November 22, 2009 at 5:39 pm #817620

    Should be for boats OVER 22′ only . Its those tuna boats

    perch_44
    One step ahead of the Warden.
    Posts: 1589
    November 22, 2009 at 7:54 pm #817639

    Quote:

    Should be for boats OVER 22′ only . Its those tuna boats

    that ain’t right either. there is no reason for any no wake zone through there.

    fishinfool
    mn
    Posts: 788
    November 22, 2009 at 8:18 pm #817643

    Ya know , sitting at the Y and getting rocked by all kinda sized boats is not my idea of a leisure day. I am kinda in favor of it at least from Evertts to the dam.

    Sorry
    FISHINFOOL

    James Holst
    Keymaster
    SE Minnesota
    Posts: 18926
    November 22, 2009 at 8:27 pm #817646

    Quote:

    I heard it was the property owners. They’re claiming bank erosion. That’s about as far as I’m going with this one jerr

    The DNR did a study in a few years back (the study itself took place over many years) regarding the impacts of large boat wakes on the shoreline habitat upstream of Pepin. The results showed some significant damage of critical shoreline habitat.

    My posting of this is in NO WAY to be taken as my support for or against. I’m merely posting this to give some background as to why the DNR might be pursuing such a change.

    clarence_chapman
    Hastings, MN Lake Isabel activist
    Posts: 1345
    November 22, 2009 at 11:26 pm #817675

    They tryed that once up here between Hastings and Prescott.
    Didnt last long

    gusschoenfeld
    Winsted, MN
    Posts: 409
    November 22, 2009 at 11:48 pm #817681

    Whats the point? Every time I’m down there I would say 10-20% of the boats dont follow the no wake rules in the area between Bay Point and the bridge.

    northstar42
    west central Minnesotsa
    Posts: 921
    November 23, 2009 at 12:54 am #817694

    Quote:

    Every time I’m down there I would say 10-20% of the boats dont follow the no wake rules in the area between Bay Point and the bridge.

    Anybody ever see a barge with no wake? They have to push more water than 50 walleye boats.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59998
    November 23, 2009 at 6:30 am #817768

    Quote:

    there is no reason for any no wake zone through there.

    I can think of a couple good reasons, but from Red Wing to the Lock will be a big pill to swallow.

    koldfront kraig
    Coon Rapids mn
    Posts: 1818
    November 23, 2009 at 1:33 pm #817807

    How many miles is it from Red Wing to the lock and dam?

    dgoodman
    Pool 4
    Posts: 102
    November 23, 2009 at 2:17 pm #817823

    4-4.5 give or take

    brad0383
    Farmington, MN
    Posts: 354
    November 23, 2009 at 2:33 pm #817831

    Quote:

    4-4.5 give or take

    That means it will take an hour to get to the dam from Red Wing. Great, how am I going to explain to my wife why I was two hours late getting home?

    jhalfen
    Posts: 4179
    November 23, 2009 at 4:29 pm #817873

    Imagine that trip in early April….or any other time we get that good 6-10 mph downstream flow going.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59998
    November 23, 2009 at 6:28 pm #817918

    It’s 6 river miles to the first no wake zone in Red Wing from the dam.

    How about a no-wake zone just in the quarter mile stretch in front of Everts?

    Where else is there a no wake zone where there isn’t a marina or a narrow section of the river (like Hudson or the Kinni on the St Croix)?

    brad0383
    Farmington, MN
    Posts: 354
    November 23, 2009 at 8:01 pm #817933

    I contaced the DNR about this. They told me that it is being discussed on a city and county level in Minnesota. The good news is that both sides of the river and the DNR have to approve it. Don’t let us down Wisconsin…SAY NO. But a no wake zone in front of Evert’s would be nice.

    tom_gursky
    Michigan's Upper Peninsula(Iron Mountain)
    Posts: 4751
    November 24, 2009 at 3:45 am #818035

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Every time I’m down there I would say 10-20% of the boats dont follow the no wake rules in the area between Bay Point and the bridge.

    Anybody ever see a barge with no wake? They have to push more water than 50 walleye boats.

    No one seems to agree with ya NorthStar but it certainly makes sense to this Mississippi visitor…

    Batman09
    Michigan
    Posts: 121
    December 13, 2009 at 5:26 am #822938

    no wake within 100 yards of my boat and I’m happy

Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.