Wake Boats, Public Rights and the Future of Elkhart Lake
A new lawsuit over Elkhart Lake’s wake boat ordinance raises a bigger local question than whether 14 wake-surfing members can keep using ballast-enhanced boats on one Sheboygan County lake.
The question is this: Who gets priority on a public lake?
Elkhart Watersports Alliance, Inc. filed a federal lawsuit on April 20 against the Village of Elkhart Lake and village trustees, according to the federal docket for Elkhart Watersports Alliance Inc. v. Shovan et al. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Wisconsin Public Radio reported that the group represents 14 members who use wake boats and wake surf on Elkhart Lake. The alliance claims the village ordinance violates state law, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Public Trust Doctrine and constitutional rights under the U.S. Constitution.
The complaint itself says the alliance has “membership consisting of 14 individuals” and that all members use wake boats to engage in wake surfing on Elkhart Lake.
That matters. Because Elkhart Lake is not a private wave pool. It is a 292-acre public lake in Sheboygan County with a maximum depth of 119 feet, a public boat landing, and fish including musky, panfish, bass, northern pike, trout and walleye, according to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
The ordinance targets artificial wake enhancement
The village ordinance does not appear to ban ordinary boating. It targets certain artificial wake-enhancing equipment and operation.
The ordinance prohibits using ballast tanks, ballast bags or fins to cause a boat to operate in a bow-high manner or increase a boat’s wake. It also prohibits operating a boat in an artificially bow-high manner that increases the wake, including continuous operation at transition speed, also described as plowing mode.
It also specifically excludes water skiing, tubing and wakeboarding with a tow rope, as long as those activities do not use ballast tanks, ballast bags or wake-enhancing fins.
That distinction is important. This fight is not really about whether people can boat on Elkhart Lake. It is about whether a small group of wake boat users should be allowed to create artificially enhanced wakes on a relatively small inland lake used by many other people.
The ordinance says artificially enhanced wakes can endanger swimmers, anglers and other watercraft. It also says the village adopted the rule to promote public health, safety and welfare, including the public’s interest in preserving natural resources.
Violations carry forfeitures of $500 for a first offense and $1,000 for a second or later offense within one year when no state boating penalty otherwise applies.
Fourteen members versus a shared lake
The alliance’s legal arguments deserve to be heard in court. The complaint says some members or family members have physical limitations and view wake surfing as a safer, lower-impact watersport than water skiing, wakeboarding or tubing.
That is a sympathetic argument. Accessibility matters. So does recreation. So does fairness.
But the public interest is bigger than 14 wake-surfing members.
Elkhart Lake is used by swimmers, anglers, paddlers, kayakers, paddleboarders, pontoon boaters, sailors, beachgoers, resort guests, families, seasonal residents and shoreline owners. Fireman’s Park and Beach is marketed as Elkhart Lake’s only public beach, with a sand beach, concession stand, picnic tables, grills, volleyball courts and restrooms.
Elkhart Lake tourism promotes the village as a four-season destination, not a single-use lake built around one expensive form of recreation.
And yes, the lawsuit itself underscores the financial stakes. The complaint claims that if the ordinance is upheld, just compensation would be required in an amount of not less than $1,799,993.83 to alliance members. It also estimates summer 2026 docking costs elsewhere at $151,893 for 14 wake boats.
That is a lot of money. But it also highlights why the public should be cautious about letting the most heavily invested users define the rules for everyone else.
The Public Trust Doctrine cuts both ways
The alliance invokes the Public Trust Doctrine. But Wisconsin’s public trust tradition is not just about the right to run a particular kind of boat.
The Wisconsin DNR says the Public Trust Doctrine protects public rights including navigation, water quality, aquatic habitat, recreational activities such as boating, fishing, hunting and swimming, and the enjoyment of scenic beauty. The DNR also says Wisconsin courts have ruled that when conflicts occur between riparian owners and public rights, public rights are primary.
That is the heart of this issue.
A public lake belongs to more than the loudest or wealthiest slice of users. It belongs to the kid swimming near shore, the person fishing from a small boat, the family in a kayak, the older couple on a pontoon, the shoreline owner watching erosion, and the visitor who came for clear water and a quiet summer afternoon.
Public trust should mean the lake is protected for all of them.
Deep water is not a blank check
Wake boat supporters often point out that Elkhart Lake is deep. The DNR lists the lake’s maximum depth at 119 feet.
Depth matters. But a deep lake is not automatically a consequence-free surf park.
A University of Minnesota study found that wakeboats operating in surfing mode can produce turbulence that directly resuspends sediment, and researchers recommended wakeboats operate in depths of at least 20 feet during surfing to reduce lakebed impacts.
Wisconsin’s Green Fire, in a 2024 literature review, identified concerns around wake boats and lake ecosystems, including aquatic invasive species, shoreline erosion, aquatic plants, sediment resuspension, birds and fish. The group also noted gaps in the science, which is exactly why local communities should be allowed to act cautiously when protecting specific lakes.
Elkhart Lake is beautiful because generations have treated it as something worth protecting. The burden should not be on swimmers, paddlers, anglers and shoreline owners to prove unlimited artificial wakes are harmful beyond all doubt. The burden should be on wake-enhanced boating advocates to show their activity can fit safely and fairly within a small shared lake.
Sheboygan already knows how to surf
There is also a local irony here.
Sheboygan is right down the road, sitting on Lake Michigan, and Visit Sheboygan describes the city as the “Malibu of the Midwest” because of its freshwater surfing conditions. The city promotes year-round surfing opportunities on Lake Michigan.
So yes, if the goal is truly surfing, Sheboygan County already has a world-class freshwater surf culture that does not require ballast tanks turning an inland lake into a wave machine.
That does not decide the lawsuit. But it does put the debate in perspective.
Elkhart Lake is 292 acres. Lake Michigan is one of the Great Lakes. Those are not the same recreational setting, and they should not be regulated as if they are.
Protecting Elkhart Lake is not anti-boater
This debate should not become “boaters versus environmentalists.” That frame is too simple.
Many boaters care deeply about clean water. Many anglers, sailors, pontoon owners and paddlers want reasonable access for everyone. Many shoreline residents are not trying to ruin anyone’s summer. They are trying to protect a lake that cannot defend itself in court.
The more honest framing is this:
Elkhart Lake can support many kinds of recreation, but not every activity belongs everywhere, in every form, at every intensity.
A local ordinance that limits artificial wake enhancement is not the death of summer. It is a village saying one activity should not overwhelm the shared rights of everyone else.
The lawsuit may decide what the village can legally do. But the community still gets to ask what it should do.
Should 14 wake-surfing members get to override a local ordinance passed to protect swimmers, anglers, paddlers, boaters, shoreline owners and the lake itself?
Or should Elkhart Lake remain what public lakes are supposed to be: shared, protected and enjoyed by more than one narrow group of users?
That is the real question.
And in Sheboygan County, where we have both a treasured inland lake and a Great Lake famous for freshwater surfing, the answer should not be hard.
What do you think? Should Elkhart Lake’s wake boat ordinance stand, or should wake surfing be allowed with limits? Share your thoughts with Sheboygan Life.
