DEC’s Push for Wakesports “Compromise” on Lake Fairlee Puts Public Safety and Fair Access at Risk

In June 2025, the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) proposed amendments to the Use of Public Waters Rules (UPW) that would put more lakes off-limits to wakesports. Under the proposal, a wakesports zone (WSZ) must include at least 100 contiguous acres of water that is at least 500 feet from shore, 3,000 feet long, and 20 feet deep, with an additional 500-foot safety buffer between wakesports and other lake users. In early December, these changes—intended to address safety concerns and cumulative impacts—moved smoothly through the Interagency Committee on Administrative Rules (ICAR).

The practical result of these standards is clear: wakesports would no longer be allowed on Lake Fairlee. This outcome was welcomed by Lake Fairlee residents, camps, and long-time lake users—but not by the boating industry and a single New Hampshire family that keeps a wake boat at a seasonal residence on the lake.

In December, groups that had petitioned for stronger wakesports rules—including the Lake Fairlee Association, all youth and family camps on the lake, and the selectboards of Thetford, Fairlee, and West Fairlee—were notified that the issue was not settled. Laura Dlugolecki of ANR (Agency of Natural Resources) convened a “small group” meeting outside the formal public rulemaking process, described as an effort to “brainstorm alternative ideas and strategies to resolve conflict” on lakes near the 100-acre WSZ cutoff.

That meeting took place on January 16. Although six lakes were nominally on the agenda (Shadow Lake in Glover, Holland Pond, Peacham Pond, Lake Parker, Lake Fairlee, and Harvey’s Lake), it quickly became apparent that Lake Fairlee was the sole focus—and that the only wakesports representation came from three members of the single wakeboat-owning family on Lake Fairlee.

Laura opened the meeting by explaining that the 3,000-foot WSZ length and 500-foot buffer on both sides of a wake boat were adopted in response to safety concerns and cumulative impacts, acknowledging that a wakeboat can dominate a lake while operating. On Lake Fairlee, however, the required zone does not fit within the available 100 acres of water that is 20 feet or more in depth.

A wide-ranging discussion followed, largely centered on the presence of five youth summer camps on Lake Fairlee, four of which are located directly along the proposed wakesports zone.

These camps are a defining feature of the lake, with a continuous history dating back to 1906. Together, they serve approximately 1,800 campers and 300 staff each summer, contributing significantly to the local economy through purchases of food, farm products, lodging, and other goods. Their programs emphasize water sports such as swimming, paddling, sailing, waterskiing, and basic waterfront skills for children as young as seven. Lake Fairlee’s generally calm waters are central to this mission—and wakesports fundamentally disrupt that safety, especially for vulnerable young campers.

During the meeting, wakeboat proponents offered a series of proposed “compromises,” each met with strong rebuttals:

• Limited operating hours (e.g., 4:00–7:00 pm) Counter-argument from a camp director: Campers use the waterfront throughout the day, including before breakfast and in the evening.
• Allowing only one wakeboat at a time, any time of day Counter-argument: The lake’s current 96 acre wakesports zone can only accommodate one wake boat at a time already. Thus, this is not a compromise at all. Additionally, this would be nearly impossible to enforce. Imagine two wake boats arriving at the public ramp. Who goes first? Whose kids have to wait?
• Claim that camp ski boats already make waves Counter-argument: Ski boats do not produce comparable wakes. A scientific analysis by St. Anthony Falls Laboratory found that wakeboat wave energy equals that of a ski boat only after traveling more than 575 feet, and wakeboat wave power after approximately 600 feet—well beyond the proposed 500-foot buffer.
• Grandfathering a resident wakeboat Counter-argument from DEC’s Jenny Austin: “Grandfathering is legally problematic.”
• Assertion that there are no conflicts on Lake Fairlee Counter-argument from Andy Pomerantz: “After being knocked off my paddleboard once and having waves wash across the front of my kayak last summer, we no longer go out on the lake when we see a wake boat in use.”

Counter-argument from the director of Camp Lochearn: “We use many paddle-boards, canoes, and kayaks. We have girls 7-8 years of age on stand-up paddleboards. I can't begin to say how dangerous it is to have wakesports on the lake. There are other camps near us, Ohana, Horizons, and Billings. We support no wake boats, they are very dangerous to children' s camps.”

Counter-argument from the director of Camp Billings: He described campers being knocked off docks and kayaks, emphasized year-round waterfront use, and noted that calm water and swim instruction are essential in an increasingly competitive camp market.

• Claim that excluding wake boats is unfair Counter-argument: The UPW Rules explicitly prioritize safety and normal uses: “Use conflicts shall be managed in a manner that provides for all normal uses to the greatest extent possible...”

Counter-argument from Lake Harvey: A single wakeboat prevents the majority of residents from using the lake.

Counter-argument from another attendee: When a wakeboat appears, other users leave the water—reducing conflict only by forcing everyone else out.

• Dismissal of invasive species concerns as “an outrageous spreading of fear since fishing boats with ‘live wells’ are allowed.” Counter-argument: A Lake Parker attendee reported seeing a wakeboat discharge its ballast tank directly into the lake. Many lakes lack inspection or greeter programs.

Jenny added that the former Home Lake Rule (that limited a wakeboat to one home lake per season, unless it was thoroughly decontaminated before moving to another lake) had been eliminated and that hot-wash stations are now recommended—raising unresolved questions about cost, feasibility, and funding.

• Concerns about enforcement Comment: The Marine Division of the State Police and Game Wardens enforce UPW Rules, but coverage is extremely limited. Each warden is responsible for roughly 300 square miles, including fish, wildlife, boating, and snowmobile enforcement.

After an hour and a half, the meeting ended with Laura Dlugolecki stating that “this is the first step” toward conflict resolution.

For Lake Fairlee’s camps, families, swimmers, paddlers, and long-time residents, the concern is clear: this process appears less about safety and more about accommodating a single household. The proposed standards already reflect compromise. Further concessions would sacrifice public safety, ecological health, and a century of shared lake use.

The DEC seeks further public comments. 

Public Hearings (In Person or Online) (Details HERE)

• January 27: Brandon Town Hall, 49 Center St, Brandon, 5:30–8:00 PM SIGN UP to speak
• February 4: VTrans Dill Building, Barre, 5:30–8:00 PM SIGN UP to speak

Written Comments: Deadline February 20th at 4:30 PM 

• Submit via the DEC online comment FORM
• For longer comments or attachments email: ANR.WSMDLakes@vermont.gov

Include “Wakesports” in the subject line.

The outcome for Lake Fairlee—and many other Vermont lakes—now depends on whether safety and science prevail over pressure from a narrow special interest.

A single wake boat in surf mode dominates virtually all of the WSZ in 3 minutes with waves larger and more powerful than those created by ski boats, effectively creating an Exclusion Zone for all other lake users. (The yellow area is 1000 ft wide.)