The Balance Between State Control and Local Authority 

A patchwork of local regulations would be challenging to enforce and could result in decisions based on incomplete or faulty reasoning, potentially exposing towns and their officials to costly and prolonged lawsuits over factual disagreements.

The NO BALLAST - NO PLANING ordinance is a BAN on wakesurfing and Waskeboarding. This BAN devalues your property by eliminating the PRIMARY use for the boat. Existing boat owners should be asking Towns how they will compensated them for the loss of use of their boat. 

Prior to invoking a BAN vs regulation, a Town should have to prove the reason for the BAN, this includes specific data regarding their lake; specific safety citations for hazardous wake infractions that have been written , lake quality data proving damage or deterioration of the lake due to wakesurfing/wakeboarding from a licensed Aquatic engineer, boating data on volume of wake boat vs all other types of boats, those on lake and those transported to the lake, and most important an economic study that includes compensating the community and the boat owners for their loss of use of their boat.

Beyond that, Towns that have substantially used the flawed St Anthony Falls study as a primary resource for creating their ordinance along with singling out ballasted boats which the data shows are no more of a danger to lakes at 200' from shore than ski boats at 100'. Research indicates that even a fishing boat, with sufficient displacement, can generate similar wave energies at 200 feet as many wake boats. (MacFarlane, 2018)  A comparison of all current studies on wave height and energy conclusively demonstrates that boats without a ballast operating between speeds of 11 and 22 mph can legally produce similar, if not greater, wave heights and energies from 100 feet than a ballasted wake boat operating from 200 feet out 

Local town boards, often made up of part-time members with limited budgets, lack the resources to hire specialized experts necessary for rigorous, evidence-based studies. 

In the absence of clear justification, decisions can become driven by bias, opinions, or the loudest voices, rather than facts. These risks infringing on the rights of others, which should concern all of us.

Wake boating regulations should be governed at the state level, rather than by individual municipalities, to ensure fair, effective, and scientifically informed decisions across all of Wisconsin's waters. Restricting public access under the Public Trust Doctrine should only be considered when there is a clear, compelling justification backed by thorough, expert-driven scientific research.

In addition, watercraft regulations should remain consistent across the state to avoid a confusing patchwork of local rules that are difficult to enforce and challenging for the public to navigate. A unified, statewide approach fosters fairness, clarity, and compliance, benefiting both the users and protectors of Wisconsin’s waters.

A statewide law is most effective when a universal standard protects the public interest, while more specific local needs can still be addressed through local ordinances that build upon these foundational protections.

• A statewide law is often best when:

  • Uniformity is Essential: Consistent rules are needed to avoid confusion and ensure fairness across all areas.  Having one standard rule provides uniformity which makes compliance straightforward for residents and visitors alike. 

  • Inter-jurisdictional Issues: For issues that affect multiple jurisdictions or span across local boundaries, like environmental protection (air and water quality standards) or invasive species control, a statewide approach ensures comprehensive coverage and avoids gaps in regulation.

  • Resource Efficiency: Statewide laws are helpful when local governments may lack the resources or expertise to implement and enforce laws independently. By centralizing certain regulations, states can provide resources and guidance, supporting consistency and effectiveness.

  • Protection of Fundamental Rights: When individual rights or safety are at stake, statewide laws can help protect residents equally. This applies to laws against discrimination, public health mandates, constitutional rights or safety regulations.

  • Economic and Commerce Consistency: In cases where business or economic factors are involved, statewide laws create a predictable regulatory environment that can help attract and retain businesses. Laws related to businesses used by heavy tourism benefit from uniformity to support economic stability and fairness.

  • Enforcement is difficult - or worse non-existent  

The Sheriffs of Vilas and Oneida Counties have made it clear that they will not enforce local ordinances unless a specific contract is in place with the town, and even then, such enforcement is not a priority. For instance, Sheriff Harman stated, “I really don’t want anything to do with it.” Additionally, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is bound by state law and cannot enforce local ordinances, placing the enforcement responsibility solely on the town.   

If a town enacts an ordinance without actively enforcing it, this creates potential liability. In the event of an incident, the town could be held responsible for failing to uphold its own regulations. There is also risk of vigilantism when local ordinances go unenforced especially given the environment of hostility toward wake boats and their owners created by the campaign of misinformation spread by anti-wake boat groups in recent years.