Leavens Withdraws Petition - It's Over (for now)

Vermont Natural Resources Board
Water Resources Panel
10 V.S.A. Ch. 151

To:	Interested Persons
From:	John Hasen, General Counsel, Natural Resources Board
Date:	July 22, 2008
Re:	Use of Public Waters: Proposed Rules for Holland Pond

__________________________________________________________

On June 17, 2008, the Water Resources Panel of the Natural Resources Board filed with the Office of Vermont Secretary of State proposed Use of Public Waters Rules for Holland Pond. The rules were filed in response to a petition filed by Gary Leavens.

The rules propose:

a. to prohibit the use of personal watercraft; and

b. to prohibit the operation of vessels powered by a motor in such a manner as to cause a disturbing wake.

On July 16, 2008, the Panel received a letter from Mr. Leavens, asking that his petition be withdrawn.

On July 22, 2008, the Panel met to discuss the July 16 request and voted to withdraw the proposed rules.

Therefore, as a result of the Panel's vote:

1. The Panel withdraws the proposed Use of Public Waters Rules for Holland Pond.
   
2. The hearing on the proposed Use of Public Waters Rules for Holland Pond, scheduled for July 31, 2008 in Holland, Vermont, is cancelled [sic]

93 Boat Photos

We've scanned and uploaded all the photos of boats, water-skiing and tubing on Holland Pond that we've collected. Click the photo below to see the slide show of them. Thanks to everyone who contributed photos!


http://flickr.com/photos/leeives/sets/72157605940715554/show/

Proposed Ammendment Documents

See website below for more documentation, including economic impact statement.

http://www.nrb.state.vt.us/wrp/rulemaking/upw2008/filedrule.htm

Update on VT Natural Resources Website

The proposed rules (a) provide a definition of "disturbing wake" in Use of Public Waters Rule 5.2; (b) prohibit personal watercraft (jetskis) and "disturbing wakes" caused by motorboats on Holland Pond; (c) prohibit waterskiing in the Retreat Meadows Basin of the West River; and (d) prohibit "disturbing wakes" on Somerset Reservoir.

The Panel has proposed this rule for the purpose of receiving public comment. The Panel will decide whether or not to adopt the proposed rule only after carefully considering all public comments received at the public hearings scheduled for this matter and in writing. In evaluating the proposed rules and related public comments, the Panel will be guided by section 2 of the current Vermont Use of Public Waters Rules and 10 V.S.A. § 1424. The Panel’s decision will be in writing. Copies of the decision will be posted on this web site and will be mailed to all persons on the Panel’s distribution list for this matter and to any additional persons who attend the public hearing, who file written comments with a mailing address, or who otherwise indicate that they would like to receive a copy.

Part of how they will evaluate Leavens' petition, from http://www.nrb.state.vt.us/wrp/publications/upw2007.pdf:

2.2 In evaluating petitions and associated public comments, the following factors, at a minimum, will be considered: the size and flow of navigable waters, the predominant use of adjacent lands, the depth of the water, the predominant use of the waters prior to regulation, the uses for which the water is adaptable, the availability of fishing, boating, and bathing facilities, and the scenic beauty and recreational uses of the area.

The public waters will be managed so that the various uses may be enjoyed in a reasonable manner, considering safety and the best interests of both current and future generations of citizens of the state and the need to provide an appropriate mix of waterbased recreational opportunities on a regional and statewide basis.

2.3 In evaluating normal recreational and other uses, the following uses will be among those considered: fishing, swimming, boating, waterskiing, fish and wildlife habitat, wildlife observation, the enjoyment of aesthetic values, quiet solitude of the water body, and other water-based activities.

Older Photos Uploaded

Will get the rest of them scanned, uploaded, printed and sent into the board next week after the holiday. To see the ones we already have uploaded, click on this photo below.

Lots more photos on their way!

Finally, a stay-at-home weekend coming up. We'll be scanning and posting more photos then. Stay tuned.

Old Photo

Some rescind original signatures

So far Lorraine has 30+ signatures, including Bakers, Lees, and Sumners. Moores have also agreed to rescind. They all signed Leavens' petition because they didn't know the full extent of it when it was presented to them. Most have also agreed to call or write the board and ask that their names be taken off.

Phone number of John Hasen has now been posted on the right sidebar of this blog, which is who we recommend calling to have your name taken off the original petition.

Letter from Patty and Steve

From Mark's Aunt and Uncle.

June 7, 2008

Vermont Water Resources Board
58 East State Street
Drawer 20
Montpelier, Vermont 05620-3201

RE: Petition filed by Gary Leavens

Dear Board Members,

In response of the ridiculous petition from Gary Leavens I would like to share the following information. He states that motorized craft are not a traditional activity on Holland Pond. Where has Mr. Leavens been for the last 60 years? My parents owned a camp on Holland Pond before I was born. That was 1948. I was brought up there. My earliest memory of Holland Pond is watching from shore, my parents fish in a motorized craft.

When I was 8 years old I began water skiing on Holland Pond (1956). I have enjoyed this activity on Holland Pond all of my life. To have outsiders come in and try to restrict this activity is just outrageous. My parents also used their motorized crafts to make the lake a safer place for all boaters. Every spring we pulled logs out so all boats, motorized or not would not collide with them. Friends of my parents also had boats and water skied on the Pond. They always used respect for others when enjoying this activity. They were always cautious boaters as we are today.

The beauty of Holland Pond today is as beautiful as it was 60 years ago. My husband and I frequent the Pond and the boats have never been a nuisance. In fact the motorized crafts have rescued many distressed swimmers and boaters alike during the last 60 years.

As far as the wildlife goes there are more loons on the lake now than when I was a child. So obviously the motorized craft has not affected them. The fishing environment is still as wonderful as it has always been. The water is still as clean as I remember it being so many years ago.

I want my grandchildren to be able to use the Pond as I did growing up. I want them to be able to learn to water ski on Holland Pond and enjoy all the water activities that I did. How much better for our children and grandchildren to be enjoying a healthy activity on the Pond rather than being on the streets somewhere else!

In closing I beg the Water Resources Board to listen to the people who have been on Holland Pond all their lives rather than a couple who rents a camp there for a couple of weeks out of the year.

Sincerely,

Stephen and Patricia Rines

Mark's notice to Gary Leavens

Mr. Leavens,

This excerpt is from a review of recreational bodies of water:

'Preview: Holland Pond sits less than a mile, as the crow flies, from the Canadian border, in the Northeast Kingdom. The pond has moderate development along its western shore, but these summer cottages (approximately 40) are much different from the ones farther south. Few big docks and few huge motorboats loom in front, and little new development is in evidence. As long as the camps remain small and unpretentious, the pond will likely remain a nice place to visit, though you may want to time your visit to avoid popular summer weekends.'

A nice review, and not a bad piece of advice from an impartial source, out of New York.

You don't know me, but very soon I imagine we will be rather well acquainted. You see, I disagree with the petition you so quietly filed with the Vermont Natural Resources Board for the adoption of a 'no wake rule' at the lake. Yes it is a Lake, it is called Holland Pond, but it is a pond in name only. I would like to add that your lack of interest in circulating the petition to all owners on the lake, and the fashion in which it was presented to many of the locals who unwittingly signed, speaks volumes. You never approached either of my parents, which seems odd to me when you have no trouble finding my Father at his work when you need roadwork done.

As far as the petition itself, now that I have a copy of my very own to read, I see exactly your angle. Your lack of intimate familiarity with the Lake, The Bill Sladyk Wildlife Management Area, and Holland, is quite obvious. You could easily get the few facts that you have gotten right out of any number of State publications.

Your statement that there is an 'increased presence of motorized wake producing activities' is, from my own observation, flat out wrong. There has been a noticeable decline over the last 11 years, two of the three boats kept at the lake haven't even been in the water for three years. Those boats pulled water skiers, and tubes, which, while not my cup of tea on a regular basis, are a tremendous amount of fun when the mood strikes.

Your statement that 'motorized wake producing activities are not common, traditional recreational uses' is also flat out wrong. My Mother grew up waterskiing on the Lake, as she has pointed out in her letter to the Board. We are collecting photos, and enlisting family and friends to send letters of support, memories of 'wake producing recreation'.

Your statement that the lake 'is a source of potable water used by the International Water Company.' is also flat out wrong. I have on several occasions dealt with Mike Houle of the IWC, as over a half mile of their water line runs across another one of my properties in Holland. The pond is only maintained as a source water for fire suppression, and the water currently runs, year round, discharging without utilization into the Tomifobia River at the pipeline's termination. It was replaced years ago with a system that takes ground water from natural aquifers. They discontinued use of the lake's water because it was nearly impossible to keep the beavers from trying to dam the intake up to raise the level of the lake, and bacteria from their feces posed too great a health risk.

I don't own any motorized watercraft, yet, neither do I want a 'quiet' lake. My canoe has offered me wonderful service for the past 11 years, since I bought my Camp, with no conflict from motorboats or personal watercraft. I also enjoy my parents' kayaks, though I avoid the camp side of the lake because I, myself, detest camp-shore-sneaks who paddle close enough to join my conversations, and seldom seem farther than a stone's throw away, and I throw like a girl. I might add, with impeccable aim.

We will be personally circulating our own counter petition, to many of the same folks who signed your petition. Some of those folks have already offered letters of retraction, stating they were not fully aware of what they were signing, and that YOU were not the person who presented it to them. I have made myself available for the site visit and subsequent public hearing on July 31st, so I look forward to meeting you soon.

If you wish to discuss this in further detail, my home Phone # is [number removed for blog], evenings are best, after dark I am usually in the house.


Mark D. Tice

Lee's Initial Reactions to Petition

Motorized, wake-producing activities on Holland Pond:

1. are not common, traditional recreational uses
   Maybe they should have done some research. This is just false information. Lorraine water-skied on Holland Pond in the 50s/60s! I grew up water-skiing, tubing, and for a short time, jet-skiing on Holland Pond in the 80s/90s.
   
   
2. disrupt the enjoyment of traditional uses of Holland Pond (paddling, fishing, quiet recreation)
   Want to know what another "quiet traditional use" is? Sitting on shore and enjoying the lake - including watching family boaters, paddlers, and fishermen, from AFAR. Guess what disrupts this enjoyment? Annoying paddlers 4 feet off shore gawking at my camp!!! Goes both ways!
   
   
3. create possible safety issues of other recreational uses
   Seeing as water-skiing is a traditional recreational use (refer to #1 above), paddlers pose potential hazards to skiers as well! Let's go ahead and call this a wash.
   
   
4. contribute to shoreline erosion problems
   This is complete BS! The shoreline is mostly granite! Ice movement, storms, and other natural events contribute to shoreline erosion.
   
   
5. are potentially harmful to water quality, flora and fauna
   Please! The amount of traffic on Holland Pond is negligible, environmentally speaking. That's why motorized activity isn't already prohibitted. It's a large lake, with only a few boats. Or it was, until all this publicity!
   
   
6. threaten the wilderness-like characteristics of the area
   Gag me. In the problem-solving field of study, this is what we call a stream of "junk words", which is just a kind phrase for "crap". It's subjective and vague.
   
   
7. are not compatible with low-intensity use management of adjacent wildlife management area
   Funny, seems it's been compatible for a decade. Seems to be working out just fine.
   
   

Got the Petition

It's a long-winded document, but here's the important part.

Purpose of Petition and Proposed Rule
The purpose of this petition, under the provisions for 10 VSA 1424, is to request the Water Resources Panel of the VT Natural Resources board adopt a no wake rule to prohibit activities by motorized vessels that would create a wake on the waters of the Holland Pond in order to protect the traditional uses and natural resources values of this unique area. A provision will be included to address the possible need for emergency vessel operation.

Motorized, wake-producing activities on Holland Pond:

1. are not common, traditional recreational uses
   
2. disrupt the enjoyment of traditional uses of Holland Pond (paddling, fishing, quiet recreation)
   
3. create possible safety issues of other recreational uses
   
4. contribute to shoreline erosion problems
   
5. are potentially harmful to water quality, flora and fauna
   
6. threaten the wilderness-like characteristics of the area
   
7. are not compatible with low-intensity use management of adjacent wildlife management area

I have scanned the entire petition, including the signature pages and Gary Leaven's contact information. You can download it at http://leeives.googlepages.com/petition.pdf or let me know if you would like me to email it directly to you.

Cheryl's Letter

Another voice heard from, sent today.

Dear Chair, Peter Young Jr., Esq.

My name is Cheryl Bedard and I am the co-owner of a camp at Holland Pond - 638 North Shore Road, as well as the owner of an adjacent buildable lot of land on the pond.

I am opposed to the changes requested by a petition that prohibit or limit the use of motorized water vehicles on Holland Pond. I have visited Holland Pond for the past 17 years and have owned property there for the past 13 years. I have seen many families and friends enjoying each other and playing together at Holland Pond. Everyone I have seen has used their watercraft responsibly for things from simple tours to sporting activities. I do not feel that motorized vehicles pose any threat to Holland Pond currently, nor have they in the past. Therefore, I am not in favor of changes to the current uses allowed at Holland Pond.

Please add my name to your notification list for matters pertaining to this petition.

Thank you for your time in this matter.

Sincerely,
Cheryl A. Bedard
[phone and address removed]

Rumored to have signed the petition

Short (unconfirmed) list of surprising campers who have signed the petition... looks like there's gonna be a few conversations to be had over the 4th.

UPDATE: most that had signed original petition have rescinded their signatures - turns out they didn't understand fully what was being presented to them by the Leavens.

Leslie's Letter to John Hasen

Email that Leslie sent on May 28th.

Dear Mr. Hasen,

My name is Leslie Ives and I co-own two camps on Holland Pond - one on South Shore Drive and the other on North Shore Drive. I have been hearing rumors of a petition that was filed in regard to the use of motorboats on Holland Pond.

In viewing the WRP website, I see that this petition was indeed discussed at your May 23rd meeting. I have not been able to obtain any information on the contents of this petition and would appreciate a copy for review. I would also appreciate being notified of any and all hearings on this matter.

I have a great interest in Holland Pond. I have been a member of the Holland Pond community for over 40 years. It has been my experience that the only 'threat' to the harmony of this community comes from people. People who don't know the value of diversity - people that try to turn 'family boating' into a crime. As I'm sure you can tell, I am not in favor of any changes to the rules of use in regard to Holland Pond.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Leslie Ives
[address and phone removed]

No lost cause...

This appears to be a typical "squeaky wheel" situation. Not that we should take it lightly. Leavens are obviously gunning for a "quiet pond" and to that I say.. Take a hike! To Beaver, Turtle, Round, Line or Halfway! Those are quiet ponds, the Lake we know as Holland Pond has no need for more rules.... this was my last communication with John Hasen:

From Mark Tice

Thanks for the info! I would like to attend the site meeting as well as the hearing? Is the site visit going to be complainant specific, or lake-wide? I can easily arrange access to 6 cottages/camp lots on South Shore drive, and with a little effort a couple on North Shore drive. I can even arrange for a by-water tour of the ENTIRE lake (minimal wake). I will notify all Landowners of our intent to sidle closely up to the shore-line for inspections. I have a watercraft at my disposal that will carry six hearty souls... Let me know if I can be of any assistance.‏

From John Hasen

Thanks. My guess is that the site visit can take place on the shore. The Panel generally likes to get an idea of the size of the lake and the uses (such as cottages) that surround it. We would probably just visit any public access point that would give the Panel the best idea of the size and uses, but if you are aware of good vantage points that would be helpful.

Public Hearing Information

From John Hasen to Mark:

Your letter to Chair Young will be treated as a comment on the proposed rule, even though the rulemaking process will not formally begin until we file it with the Secretary of State. There will be public notices of hearings. Right now it looks like we will be having the Holland Pond hearing on July 31 at 7:00 PM after a 4:00 PM site visit.

Mark's Letter

Natural Resources Board

Attn: Chair, Peter Young Jr.
National Life Records Center Building
National Life Drive
Montpelier, Vermont 05620-3201
(802) 828-3309

Regarding: Holland Pond Petition discussion via teleconference on
Friday May 23rd 2008, at 1:30 p.m.

Mr. Chairman,

I would like to request a copy of the minutes to the meeting referenced above, the petition which precipitated this meeting, and any proposed rules that are being considered. Regretfully I was unaware of the petition and the resulting teleconference. I was in the general area that very day and would have gladly attended, had I known.

I am a native of Holland, a lifetime member of the Holland Pond Community, a camp owner, and co-owner of a second camp. My parents were the first, and remain one of only two couples that are year-round residents on the lake. They were not approached with the aforementioned petition, otherwise I would have been aware of this much sooner than I have thus become.

The conditions under which the petition originated and the subsequent “circulation” of the petition seem to me to ooze personal vendetta. Regrettably there appears to be a lack of neighborly relations at the north end of the lake. It would seem a shame that such a personal vendetta would spill over to affect all camp owners and even the general public, under the guise of protecting shoreline. Spring ice movement and natural wave action causes considerably more impact/damage than any boating activity I have ever observed on the lake. I would also point out that the lake's uninhabited shores are naturally protected as they are rimmed with granite boulders, thick scrubby vegetation, and in many places consist of solid granite bed-rock. Any cottages losing shoreline have, most likely, been altered. Generally folks have either removed the naturally occurring boulders, removed stabilizing growth, or filled past the point at which the shoreline would normally reside.

I would also like to take this opportunity to express my concern over the petition and the potential effect of any proposed rule changes on Holland Pond. The historical and continued use(s) of the lake, as an asset to the town and community at large, speaks for itself. It is my personal opinion that the rules and regulations currently governing the use of the lake should remain unchanged, and unfettered by personal agenda or vendetta through unfounded environmental claims. Restrictions of any kind would prove to be detrimental in the loss of tourist income for the state, rental income for some owners, and the greater loss of a safe lake that campers and locals alike can utilize for recreational activities such as water skiing, tubing, and jet skiing.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Respectfully,
Mark D.Tice

Photo from October 2007

Oct 2007

Water Resources Panel Meeting Minutes

Mark received these from board staff Denise Wheeler

• From the 5/13/08 STATE OF VERMONT, NATURAL RESOURCES BOARD, WATER RESOURCES PANEL MEETING
  

  The Holland Pond petition seeks to prohibit personal watercraft (jet skis) and apply the “no wake” rule on Holland Pond.
  
  Bill Martinez made a motion not to go forward with rulemaking on Holland Pond because there is no demonstration in the petition that there is currently a significant conflict of uses on the pond; this was seconded by Mike Hebert and voted unanimously by the Panel. John Hasen was instructed by the Panel to write a memo to Gary Leavens, the petitioner, advising him of the Panel’s decision.
  

  
  
  
• From the 5/23 STATE OF VERMONT, NATURAL RESOURCES BOARD, WATER RESOURCES PANEL
  TELECONFERENCE MEETING
  

  Bill Martinez made a motion to reopen the vote on Holland Pond. He moved that personal water craft also known as jet skis be prohibited on Holland Pond and that further, the “no disturbing wake” rule apply to Holland Pond. His motion was seconded by Joan Nagy and approved four to one with William Davies voting no.
  
  John Hasen was instructed by the Panel to prepare a proposed rule for filing with ICAR.