PUBLIC CONSULTATION: WAKESURF ACTIVITIES – LAKE ST-PIERRE

1 PROBLEM SPACE

 The restrictions on the use of the municipal ramp (2014) have had no effect on the number of wakeboats and on the popularity of wakesurfing…  Users have access to private ramps  Wakesurfing activity is dominated by a minority of lake St-Pierre property owners (~23 out of +400)  Over 115 complaint letters addressed to mayor in fall 2020 !  Wakesurfing dominates over all other activities of lake St-Pierre…  capsizing, (dangerous outside the morning hours)  Violent rocking of /docks, broken docks, fallen children/pets  Dirty water unsuitable for , pumps blocked  Codes of ethics /nautical guide / awareness campaigns published by the municipality are ignored 2 PROBLEM SPACE (CONT’D)

 Wakeboat horsepower is huge (200-500 HP) … and continues to increase year over year

All of this horsepower is dedicated to the generation of waves, and not to propel the (since wakesurfing is conducted at a speed of 11.2 mph = 18 km/h)  Wave action on shorelines is equivalent to > 100 – 200 H.P.  Significant shoreline erosion caused by wakesurfing waves  Wave amplitudes ~ 20x greater than those caused by winds (0-20 cm VS 1-2m)  Erosion is deposited onto lake bottom leading to accelerated aging of lake  Uprooted waterfront trees and other vegetation  Loss of up to 13’ of shoreline reported by one owner!

3 PROBLEM SPACE (CONT’D)

 Shaking/mixing/suspension of sediments by wave action - conditions conducive to the growth of milfoil more milfoil  Most shoreline consists of organic layer of sediments approx. 2’ – 3’ in thickness  Embedded phosphates and other organic mixing of materials are released promoting sédiments more

growth of milfoil erosion

winter winter

 Other organic materials are released summer  Filthy water – unsuitable to swimming waves

 Spread of invasive species more (such as Eurasian milfoil, mussels…) via sediments wakeboat ballasts from lake to lake  Dangerous waves for pets/seniors/children/small boats)  Destructive waves (to shoreline property/installations) 4 PROBLEM SPACE (CONT’D) Mixing / Shaking of Bottom Sediment Layer

milfoil zone 1’

2’ < depth < 15’ 15’

sediment layer thickness > 2’

5 PROBLEM SPACE (CONT’D) Mixing / Shaking of Bottom Sediment Layer

wakesurf waves > 2’ shaking/mixing of sediment layer Promotes suspended sediment milfoil growth Release of phosphor and other organic matter

6 PROBLEM SPACE (CONT’D) Coalition Navigation (https://coalitionnavigation.ca/fr/)

According to scientific studies…

 Wakeboat waves must travel a distance of 300 metres before losing their power (paper published by l’UQAM)

 Effects of wakeboat waves act up to 5m deep (paper published by l’U. Laval (2015) - Dr. Sébastien Raymond

A wakeboat requires a 600 meter channel and a water depth of 5 meters to avoid negative impacts on the environment NOTE: Average Wakeboat HP has increased since study !!! 7 LAKE ST-PIERRE Navigable area: ~ 3 km2 Shoreline1: ~ 25 km 1buffer zone of 30m

Note: For comparison, a circular lake would offer 4x more navigableA surface area milfoil per km of shoreline

virtually all of lake Large waves don’t have St-Pierre’s shoreline a chance to dissipate is exposed to because the lake wave action is very narrow (~300m) from wakesurfing

8 LAKE ST-PIERRE

Lake St-Pierre is naturally protected from winds

no waves

NO EROSION

9 LAKE ST-PIERRE lake St-Pierre is protected from winds

shorelines have NEVER been exposed to waves a fragile lake when subjected to 20X NO NATURAL wakesurfing waves

EROSION 10