06-25-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER 1: Surface Use of Metropolitan Lakes accommodate all compatible uses when feasible, minimize adverse effects on the lake, minimize user conflicts, and conform to state statutes and niles. When assessing an ordinance, the DNR considers factors such as a lake's physical characteristics, existing management plans and development, accident history, and the control preferences of lake users. Several factors can indirectly control lake surface use. User density can be indirectly regulated by the number of mooring buoys, docks, public and private boat ramps, marinas, and available parking"spaces for boat trailers. Types of use can also be regulated by these facilities. For example, boat ramps can be designed so they cannot be used by larger boais.^-' Both the DNR and local governments have some authority over these indirect controls on surface use (see Table 5.1 in (Thapter 5). Counties and municipalities often do not restrict surface use on lakes in their jurisdictions. Only about 1(X) lakes in the seven-county area have surface use ordinances. Half of these are located in Hennepin County. Surface use ordinances arc least common in the outer suburbs. Restrictions in the ordinances vary in degree from relatively small zones regulating speed to entire lakes where motors are prohibited. Many boaters in the metropolitan area favor increased surface use regulations. In 1984, a survey commissioned by the DNR asked boaters on 23 metropolitan lakes what, if any, special boating restrictions they felt were needed on the lake they used. Fifty-two percent of boaters favored use restrictions on their lake.^® By comparison. 38 percent of boaters in nonh central Minnesota and 10 percent of boaters in west central Minnesota requested surface use restrictions. Boaters who considered their lake to be crowded most frequently asked for restrictions. However, about half of those who felt their lake was uncrowded still requested surface use restrictions. Riparians (persons owning land on the banks of the water body) and marina users asked for restrictions more frequently than did public access users. Metropolitan boaters who requested surface use restrictions asked for wake or speed regulations most frequently. Restrictions on boat type, size, and horscjx»wer were also commonly mentioned, as was greater enforcement of existing rules. Enforcement agencies lightly patrol most lakes. By stanite, counties and the DNR are responsible for enforcement of watercraft reflations in Minnesota. The U.S. Park Service also patrols the Lower St. Croix Riverway. Municipalities, with the exception of Minneapolis and its Park and Recreation Board, generally play a minor role in patrolling lakes. As a result of limited funds and staffing, counties concentrate on patrolling the most heavily used lakes in their jurisdictions. Enforcement is greatest on Lake Minnetonka, White Bear Lake. Pr^'r Lake, Lake Waconia, and the Mississippi and St. Croix Rivers. .Many other lakes are patrolled only two or three times each summer. Some lakes in outlying areas arc never patrolled by county officers because they arc so lightly used. The 13 Department of Natural Resources conservation officers assigned to the metropolitan area also have responsibilities for overseeing the lakes, and may be more likely tc visit the smaller lakes during the year.m Effectiveness of surface use restrictions Surface use restrictions can be effective lake management tools. Surface use restrictions fall into three general categories: type of use. time zoning, and area zoning. Certain types of restrictions are most effective on certain types of lakes. Area zoning, for example, works best for small bays that can be marked off by buoys. The Dcpanmeni of Natural Resources does not favor such indirect approaches to regulating surface use because they may effectively discriminate against some persons. Instead, the department favors direct neasurcs, such as surface use zoning. Barstad and Karasov.