Lake Martin Topics: Boating Bill Editorial Comment
(Lake Martin Specific)
111,226 messages
Updated 8/28/2024 4:39:15 PM
Lakes Online Forum
83,915 messages
Updated 9/7/2024 7:52:09 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,200 messages
Updated 8/23/2024 12:20:47 PM
(Lake Martin Specific)
4,171 messages
Updated 5/29/2024 10:51:34 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,171 messages
Updated 6/27/2024 7:05:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
(Lake Martin Specific)
169 messages
Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
LifeTime Laker
-
|
Subject:
|
Boating Bill Editorial Comment
|
Date:
|
4/14/2006 8:09:35 AM
|
|
My only argument would be that wave action on shoreline has no relation to proximety to shoreline. The wave may not be visible, but it's action is there, none the less. Recent studies show that a wave in water is the closest thing to perpetual motion that can be found on earth. Wave action lasts until it is broken up by some external force. Seawalls richochet waves back into the body of water. Natural sloping shoreline will dissapate the energy of the wave, but will increase erosion. That is one reason that the best seawall on 'big water' is sloping rip rap.
I have watched the arguments back and forth on the forum, but have not seen anyone bring up this point. So limiting the proximity of wakes to shoreline may appear to have a significant impact on erosion, it really does not. It will however, limit damage and a effect on the surface i.e.- boats tied to piers. But on the other hand, waves being inherent in bodies of water, each boat owner HAS to be responsible for securing thier own watercraft in a manner to prevent damage from 'wave action'. As has been pointed out on the forum, a windy day can produce very large waves on the 'big water'.
I was brought up to believe that it was a law there be no wake within 100 feet of any structure or shoreline. My Dad taught me this growing up. It turns out that it is not a law, but simple courtesy he was teaching me. (I learned this a few years back when another forum member challenged me on the "law" aspect of this)
Bottom line Mav, I enjoyed the editorial. It brought up some points that I had not considered, and gave me food for thought. I have not at this time changed my position on the issue, but it was nice to see many points brought up without the 'back and forth bickering' that has ruled on the forum of late.
I am not an engineer, but I do watch Discovery Channell.
|
|