Private Lakes and State Regs

[Golfguy]

I don’t know if this has been discussed prior. Our private lake community is discussing whether we should/must abide by our state's boating and skiing regulations. Is there similar experience in the group with this topic?

 

Thanks for your input

 

[gregy]

I don't think so.

[boarditup]

Depends on the state. Most of the time they don't enforce most regulations because the public is not involved.

[A_B]

We don't follow the ski observer rules or Registration Letters in our private Ohio lakes, or in Michigan. Don't need a fishing or hunting license either, just a duck stamp if I remember correctly. Private property is private po

[The_MS]

@AB I think you still need a duck license to hunt waterfowl and must abide by the set limits.

[Edbrazil]

Well, you could be rolling the dice. Back in the mid to late 1970's, at the "Ultra Pond" site that we found in NH, we were never bothered by the State, but for sure we were well under the state's 150 foot clearance vs. boat and shore on turns. The pond was a little under the state's 10 acre limit. But these days, who knows. As I have posted before, it won't be long before you will need a government permit to go to the toilet. And, that is the cleaned-up version.

 

The lake, originally constructed as a holding pond for silt, was dug out for fill for Interstate 89.

You can go to: 43d 28m 06s North and 72d 06m 29s West to see it on Google Earth.

 

We eventually lost the site, supposedly because there was concerns about the earthen dam there. Many great years and many great times. And, the damn deal was pretty much a bunch of Corps of Engineers BS, but that was around the time that another earthen dam failed in NH.

 

Anyway, the last thing that I would do is to approach the State. 99% they will find some way to screw you over with regulations, taxes, fines, whatever.

[mwetskier]

if you have a club house prominently post the state rules and regulations there without further comment. a group is not collectively responsible for all parties obeying laws that address individuals so if someone in your group should choose to violate the rules you are not required to correct them or report them and its hard for a govt agency to enforce rules on property they have no free access to.

[ForrestGump]

I wouldn't do it until forced. Once you do, there's no going back.

[crashman]

I've never heard of needing an observer on a private lake

[PatM]

Sometimes we don't have an observer on a public lake. Breaking the law, breaking the law ....

[Horton]

Vote in your own rules and go ski. The state rules are going to be silly.

[MrJones]

I cannot imagine why anyone would want to bring the local, state, or federal government into anything that you don't want screwed up.

[lpskier]

 

In New York, Section 30 of the Navigation Law provides, in part: "The commissioner shall have jurisdiction over navigation on the navigable waters of the state and, except as otherwise provided, shall enforce the provisions of this chapter and the regulations established thereunder."

 

Section 4 of that law defines "navigable waters of the state" as follows: "

4. "Navigable waters of the state" shall mean all lakes, rivers, streams and waters within the boundaries of the state and not privately owned, which are navigable in fact or upon which vessels are operated..." That same section defines "navigable in fact" as follows: "

5. "Navigable in fact" shall mean navigable in its natural or unimproved condition, affording a channel for useful commerce of a substantial and permanent character conducted in the customary mode of trade and travel on water. A theoretical or potential navigability, or one that is temporary, precarious and unprofitable is not sufficient, but to be navigable in fact a lake or stream must have practical usefulness to the public as a highway for transportation."

 

In my opinion, New York navigation laws would not apply to a privately owned ski lake, like the Pangaea Puddle, for example, because the lake is all privately owned, including (most importantly) the land under water, because the lake is not "a channel for useful commerce," and, most probably, and because what commerce there is (ski school, tournaments) is unprofitable. Only real estate investor makes money on a ski lake when all expenses are figured in the mix. I expect that a really shrewd lake owner breaks about even at best.

[BlueSki]

You probably would have been fine until you asked the question online. I am sure the NSA forwarded your information to the local authorities.

[LeonL]

@Golfguy, what @Horton said. However, @Edbrazil stated the obvious, you may be in violation by doing some of the things we as skiers normally do. Enforcement of said laws and/or regulations may be nonexistent. Here's my story in KY. We had been skiing on our privately owned site for over 15 years with no interaction with boating enforcement. Then we had an injury to a B3 tricker that required calling an ambulance. The ambulance personnel were required to report the incident to Fish and Wildlife, because that is the boating enforcement agency in KY. When the officer arrived he asked me a bunch of questions and asked to see the boat that was involved. That's when I started asking questions, like why did he need to see the registrations numbers(boat was covered by this time) since it was a privately owned site. He promptly informed me that ALL the regulations on the books are enforceable on ALL bodies of water in the state. He further informed me that, as opposed to other law enforcement agencies that require normal "probable cause", he could come onto private property at his discretion due to the fact that "wildlife are present everywhere" and thus probable cause always exists. Scared the shit out of me, expecting them to show up regularly since they now knew we existed. That was 3 years ago and only once have they returned (left the gate open to let a friend in to fish, my bad) and he was cited for no fishing license. Fortunately it was just before we began skiing for the season. Moral, keep a low profile. For those who have read this from me before, I apologize, but probably @Golfguy had not.

[oldjeep]

Ah, the joy of living in MN - no observer required, just a mirror

[gregy]

@leonl Texas doesn't require a fishing license for private lakes (unless the owner of the lake requires it).

[Golfguy]

Thank you, this has been very helpful. It seems that jurisdiction is questionable and we should exercise common sense safety as we have for many years. Begging for forgiveness is always better than asking government for permission.

[jcamp]

@golfguy same with the wife too.

[Greg Banish]

In Michigan, the DNR (Department of Natural Resources) has jurisdiction over all bodies of water. Further, the water itself is always considered public, regardless of whether it's surrounded by private land. This just means that you can control access to the water by prohibiting use of the surrounding land, but if someone were to drop a boat in with a helicopter to ski/fish/tube/cruise/whatever, they are free to do so. The upshot is that this just means all public waterway laws are potentially enforceable on any body of water.

[MISkier]

If you are worried about an observer, Michigan law will let you ski without an observer if you are a Level 1 Waterski instructor. There are some other stipulations about certain markings on the boat, etc. But, it can be done with the right USA Waterski qualification.

[SusanT]

@Golfguy In general private property changes what laws need to be followed. In gated subdivisions, the police do not have jurisdiction to issue speeding tickets or other traffic violations since the roads are private. It could be argued that the same applies to a private waterway. Hence, if i choose to ski without a vest the state water cops do not have jurisdiction over that.

[MISkier]

Here is the Michigan law allowing for no observer.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%283eek01yvrs5k1k3ngzcgp3j0%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-324-80152

 

 

[klindy]

And @MISkier I believe Mr Hosner is still the liaison. I mention that because he's been instrumental in building that relationship and developing the rules over the years. As a former MI skier myself it made getting the permit infinty easier than I could by myself.

[KcSwerver]

Even if it was unlawful to trick without a vest or ski without an observer, who is out there on your private property to enforce this under law. Honestly... Do what you want on your property

[lpskier]

@KcSwerver NSA, CIA drone, DEA helicopter looking for your pot crop, EPA checking your water for run off from your neighbor's farm (be careful, they may be armed when they arrive, ask the Alaskans!). Oh, and your neighbor whose is pissed off at you because you won't let his kid fish or swim in your lake, takes your picture from the bushes and turns it in to the local PD. Other than that, nobody.

[Sethro]

Illinois sounds about the same as Kentucky. DNR can enforce any of the public water laws at our private site. However, they have never stopped by. I wish Illinois could adopt some sort of "no observer" law, but I don't see it happening.

[behindpropellers]

In Ohio the ODNR has jurisdiction over all water.

 

If you have an accident they can cite you. Its even against the law to have a ski jump in Ohio.

 

I know this because I witnessed a serious skiing accident that was almost fatal at a private lake. I was grilled by the dnr for 2 hours during a post accident interview.

 

 

 

I'm a fan of contingency plans and three people skiing together when possible.

 

Tim

[XR6Hurricane]

If someone told me I needed numbers, observer, etc. on MY PRIVATE PROPERTY I would throw them off my property and if they didn't leave I'd get an attorney. Some of this stuff HAS to be able to be challenged. Citing someone for a watercraft violation on private property would be like the state police giving a NASCAR driver a speeding ticket at the Daytona 500.

[LeonL]

@XR6Hurricane, it would get pretty dicey "throwing" an armed law enforcement officer off your property. Get an attorney or not, said mouthpiece cannot change existing laws or regulations. As I stated earlier, I was shocked to find out that we were subject to all the laws and regs, same as public water.