Nautibynature

@DGravelle, just do it! We went last year for the first time after years of putting it off. I wish we would've went sooner. It is the only vacation I have ever been on that I wasn't ready to come back home from at the end of the week. This will be an annual trip for us. @Tevskis, Amy and I still yell Up, Turn, GO from time to time. We will be there for tennis week this year. The Seattle girls are coming back that week as well.

http://nkccnews.com/local-news/2015/08/11/no-action-on-water-ski-ordinance-in-new-kent-more-research-to-be-conducted/ Back in the paper

I went back in front of the Board of Supervisors again tonight. After hearing from Mr. Allen at the July work session and watching the local news coverage, I had no problem with speaking for the 3 minutes allowed. Below are my remarks. Board members, the first time I stood here before you I asked Why is skiing illegal on the lake? Tonight I stand here to answer that question. This ordinance is not about fishing, it is not about safety, it is not about noise. This ordinance is about a small group of people that are protecting their own selfish interests, nothing more and nothing less. They are using the reasons I just mentioned in an attempt to manipulate you into maintaining an ordinance that is arbitrary and discriminatory in nature. We learned a lot about this ordinance at the July work session. 1. We learned that the water in the lake is indeed public. 2. We learned that no other county in Virginia has an ordinance like this. 3. We learned that the two boat landings on the lake launch over 150 boats per weekend, but somehow the lake is too small and there is no room for a couple of skiers. 4. We learned that if this ordinance is changed, Mr. Allen is of the opinion that it would hurt his business. If that is true, the logical conclusion is that enacting this ordinance helped his business back in 1979 when he was a member of this board. That is a clear conflict of interest and should be reason enough to end this restriction. 5. We learned from Mr. Allen that he turns away ski boats that have every right to be on the lake. While this perhaps is a heavy handed way for him to support his fishing business, for the county to ban skiing for the same reason just seems plain wrong. 6. We learned that a lawyer has a place on the Charles City side who enjoys waterskiing in the lake, but that doesn't bother either of the landing operators or ruin the fishing. It also demonstrates that there is indeed safe, skiable waters in this lake. It should also be safe to assume that there were people skiing in the lake on a regular basis prior to July 1979 when this ordinance was put into place. 7. Last but not least, We learned that it is perfectly legal for us to ski on the lake as long as we stay in Charles City waters. Are we to completely disregard the Coast Guard rules of navigation that pertain to oncoming boat traffic? Or, are we to follow the Coast Guard rules and be charged with a class 4 misdemeanor because we crossed into New Kent waters while staying to the right of oncoming boat traffic when skiing upriver? The only thing truly making it unsafe to ski in Chickahominy Lake is this ordinance. There is no clear line marking the center of the channel, making this ordinance vague and impossible to enforce. I would agree with Mr. Allen, there are underwater hazards, weeds, and shallow areas in the lake… Just like in every other public body of water in our area. However, this is the only one where skiing is illegal. If safety were truly the reason behind this ordinance, Why weren’t similar restrictions placed on other waters? I am of the opinion that the correct answer is, Mr. Allen did not own a business that catered to fishermen on those other waters. Safety is simply a façade that needs to be removed from this discussion. Once again I have stood before you and offered several reasons why this law doesn’t make sense. I again would like to ask the board to eliminate this restriction on waterskiing in the lake. We have yet to hear one logical reason why this law should not be changed. How in good faith could this board support an ordinance that benefits only a few private interests? Thank you once again for your time and consideration to this matter.

I have been dealing with some low back pain since Memorial Day weekend. Went to the doctor and was prescribed PT. After a month of that I had an xray and mri this morning. Found out I have Degenerative Disk Disease and got an injection. Look at L4,L5 and L5, S1. No more white.

@sgregg do you have an Insta slalom? The article states no permit necessary if you take it up at the end of the day.

http://m.nbc12.com/nbc12/db_330650/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=D9cNkPcc We made the local news. Anyone else notice the conflict of interest? The safety issue is a joke, they are describing every body of water in the area, this is the only one skiing is illegal.

It's a 1200 acre lake, are there parts of it not suitable for skiing, without a doubt... Just like any other body of water. There is plenty of skiable water.

Got a fight on our hands. http://nkccnews.com/local-news/2015/07/28/new-kent-water-skiing-ordinances-history-may-affect-future-decision-on-issue/

@rodb and @Bill22 thanks for the support, there aren't many skiers in the county. I will post any updates here.

I will keep you posted, from what I gather there will be a public hearing first, then they decide whether or not to vote on it.

This is exactly what I said at the meeting. I am here to speak against New Kent County Ordinance 46-52 which prohibits waterskiing on Chickahominy Lake. There are no state laws, Game and Inland Fisheries or Water Works regulations restricting access of any kind to the lake. There are no vessel; size, type, horsepower, or speed restrictions. There are also no hunting or fishing restrictions. It is perfectly legal for me to drive my ski boat anywhere on the lake. BUT, as soon as my wife or I ski on the lake we would be charged with a Class 4 misdemeanor...WHY? Why would we be charged with a crime for skiing on a public body of water? Walker’s Dam was built in 1943 to prevent salt water from infiltrating the portion of the river above the dam, ensuring an adequate water supply to Newport News Shipbuilding. This low water dam did not create the boundaries of the lake, it only made part of the river non tidal. The War Department recognized it needed to keep unrestricted access to this portion of the river available to all God’s creatures, so a fish ladder and boatlocks were installed as part of the original construction. Recently a lot of money was spent rebuilding the locks with the sole purpose of keeping boat traffic between the river and the lake unrestricted. There is no requirement of being a New Kent County resident to use the lake which serves as the New Kent/Charles City county line. This law also restricts the residents of Charles City from skiing, as the wording of the law does not specify certain areas of the lake nor does it state it only applies to people who launch their boats from the New Kent side. If a Conservation Police Officer observes a person skiing they would issue a summons regardless of residency or location in the lake. I am a resident of the Colonies and own several hundred feet of shoreline on Diascund Creek. My rights as a waterfront property owner stop at my shoreline, I have no control over boat traffic or activities in the creek. The same holds true for property owners on the Lake. It shouldn't matter if they like water skiing or not, this is not a private lake with a property owners association that has the authority to govern activities on the lake. Just to be clear, I do not believe any recreational activity should be restricted by a county ordinance. Why does New Kent County think it is okay to take away the rights of even one person on a public body of water. What did the county gain by making skiing illegal? Why is the county giving preference to one recreational activity over another? I asked this question when I first found this ordinance, and I ask it again tonight. Why is skiing prohibited on Chickahominy Lake. There is no logical answer that justifies continuing this prohibition. I would like the board to begin the process of ending this ordinance that effectively and specifically restricts the freedom of the general public to use this body of water. Board members, you have an opportunity to change this law that most people don't even know exists. If you decide not to take action to eliminate this ordinance, Does it mean you support it? Gentlemen, Thank you for your time and attention to this matter

We got the ball rolling, hopefully we will get this changed.

No problem @Bill22

No course in the river but we sure had some fun bustin all this glass.

@6balls that was the name of a boat I had a few years back. 292 Fastech with blower motors. It was dam sure nauti!

I went back in Feb for the first time and it was the best vacation my wife and I have ever been on. This will be an annual trip for us.

I feel your pain, the exact same thing happened a few hours ago. We were out free skiing on some glass, this is my back foot. I got back on my ski, lost the rope and while riding it down my back foot came out of my rtp and slammed into the ski. Most painful to date for sure.

On/Off then wax as it will strip any wax that's on there.

I recently struggled with this and the solution for me was to concentrate on keeping my shoulders back. Hook a handle to something (on land) and get in your ski position. If you let your shoulders roll forward your butt will drop. Roll your shoulders back and it will keep your hips up. Hope this helps.

I'm so ready, Ski Paradise was such a tease.

Next time I see him in the creek I'll snap a picture if I remember. Another month and I'll be out there several times a week.

He still has it and pulls trick skiers quite frequently. If you were with him then I know you were in Diascund Creek. Lol

I'm sure one of them was The creek I live on, Diascund Creek?

I'm on the Chick and also have a course I will be setting up from time to time. Went to Ski Paradise for vacation this year.... Best vacation I've ever been on. Tried the course for the first time and am now hooked. Feel free to message me. I bought an Insta slalom.

I just upgraded from an 89 PS190 to a 94 PS190. The 94 came with PP (paddle wheel), was garage kept, and only 342 hours. My 89 sold for full asking price in 5 days on Craigslist. It had 1400 hours and was in great shape.