logo
'1 lake, 1 boat' policy intended to keep invasive species out of Pelican Lake sparks concerns from businesses

'1 lake, 1 boat' policy intended to keep invasive species out of Pelican Lake sparks concerns from businesses

CBC23-05-2025

Social Sharing
New boating regulations at Pelican Lake are raising concerns among some business owners, who say the changes may drive visitors away from the southwestern Manitoba region during the crucial summer tourism season.
Dorothy Bright, who co-owns a gas station in Ninette, says her business has already taken a hit since the Rural Municipality of Prairie Lakes introduced new rules aimed at preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species like zebra mussels. She said she's seen a 31 per cent drop in sales compared to this time last year.
If things continue to get worse, she doesn't know if her business will survive.
"They've locked up our lake," she said. "The tourists aren't coming because they've heard."
The RM's new "one waterbody watercraft" bylaw means boaters who want to use Pelican Lake can't use their watercraft in other bodies of water without inspection and decontamination.
The municipality's aquatic invasive species prevention plan includes a $100 seasonal fee for motorized watercraft and $25 for non-motorized vessels for residents, who will receive a decal that will "confirm that the watercraft is declared a one-waterbody watercraft," the bylaw says.
Visitors will have to pay a $40 inspection fee before they're allowed to launch boats on the lake.
To enforce the new system, which officially came into effect May 5, more than 20 lake access points have been blocked, and an inspection station has been set up in Ninette. Boat launch gates are now open daily from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
The municipality says the rules are necessary to protect the lake's ecosystem and the long-term viability of tourism.
But Bright worries the fees will drive people to visit other lakes, where they can access the province's free aquatic invasive species inspection program.
"None of the other lakes are locked down," she said. "We are the only ones with this exorbitant fee."
Lake health a priority: reeve
Prairie Lakes Reeve Darren Seymour says the RM has spoken with other regions impacted by aquatic invasive species, and found that prevention is key.
"We certainly don't want to impact our businesses locally. We don't want to deter travel," Seymour said.
"But if we were to contract [invasive species], that would be detrimental to our businesses as well, and it would be detrimental to the ratepayers around the lake who own the cottages."
Invasive species like zebra mussels have become a concern elsewhere in the province. North of Pelican Lake, Parks Canada has banned the use of motorized watercraft on Clear Lake this year, in an effort to curtail the spread of the invasive species, which was first discovered in the province in 2013. Zebra mussels have since been found in Cedar Lake and Lake Manitoba, as well as Clear Lake.
Seymour said there's no sign of zebra mussels in Pelican Lake yet, but the RM is monitoring for them.
He said there's been buy-in from the Prairie Lakes community on preventing the spread of invasive species in Pelican Lake, with 219 permits for motorized watercraft and 182 for non-motorized vessels sold locally.
The program is currently being paid for entirely by the fees paid by lake users, and will cost an estimated $120,000 to $140,000 for inspections, staffing and infrastructure, including a newly built inspection shed and barrier installations, said Seymour.
The initial work to get the program off the ground has relied on a volunteer group, Friends of Pelican Lake. Seymour says the members of the group have not been publicly named due to personal attacks on social media.
"We're doing everything we can to keep the cost down for the fisherman that's travelling here, to protect the businesses. We're doing everything to keep the cost down for the local ratepayer as best we can," Seymour said.
But not all municipalities around Pelican Lake are on board with these plans.
The RM of Killarney-Turtle Mountain, which borders about a third of one side of the lake, has declined to participate in the access control program. Two boat launches fall along the boundary between the two municipalities, but Seymour says the risk of non-compliance is minimal.
"Is one or two boats going to get in, or a few boats going to circumvent the program and get in at those locations, possibly?" Seymour said. "One or two boats is a small fraction of the boats that are adhering to the program and going through it."
The RM of Killarney-Turtle Mountain said in a statement it supports aquatic invasive species education and prevention, but is not prepared to implement access restrictions on the lakes within its jurisdiction.
Economic fallout
Meanwhile, businesses like E&J Bait say they're feeling the effects.
Owner Eric Evans says business has dropped dramatically compared to last year.
From May 1 to May 20, sales of seasonal boat launch passes were down 85 per cent, daily passes were down 89 per cent, and overall sales dropped over 80 per cent, he said.
"With the chains and gates up, it has a bad outlook on the town, and it's potentially keeping people away and causing them to go elsewhere," Evans said.
He believes education, rather than restrictions and fees, would be a more effective solution.
"I just feel like this, the whole mitigation plan, is going to affect the town more than I think they realize," Evans said.
Bright agrees, saying the municipality should find a way to make the program free to encourage more people to participate and learn how to prevent the spread of invasive species. She wishes the community had been a bigger part of the conversation before the program was implemented.
"The community as a whole is, they're supportive, they understand that the lake is important, but we also understand that economically this hurts," Bright said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds
Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds

Vancouver Sun

time43 minutes ago

  • Vancouver Sun

Court rules Trump's tariffs can stay in effect while appeal proceeds

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs will remain in place while a case is heard — extending an emergency stay granted after a lower court found the devastating duties unlawful. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found 'a stay is warranted under the circumstances.' It provides a temporary victory for the Trump administration as it hits its first legal barriers for realigning global trade. The U.S. Court of International Trade last month said Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. The ruling from the three-judge panel at the New York-based federal court in May said 'any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional.' It said 'the challenged tariff orders will be vacated,' representing a nationwide injunction against any further imposition of the duties. Trump administration quickly was granted an emergency motion, essentially freezing the decision by the trade court that blocked the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs. The appeals court upheld that stay but noted the need for an expedited hearing, saying 'these cases present issues of exceptional importance warranting expedited en banc consideration.' A proposed schedule says arguments are expected in court by July 31. That means that countries will continue to be hit by those duties, for now. Stock markets have been in turmoil and supply chains have been upended as Trump used unprecedented presidential power to enact his tariffs. Up until Trump's return to the White House, IEEPA had never been used by a president to impose tariffs. Trump hit Canada with economywide duties in March after he declared an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of fentanyl. He partially paused levies a few days later for imports that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. Trump took his trade war to the world in April with duties on nearly every country saying America's trade deficits amounted to a national emergency. The president walked back the most devastating duties a few hours later but left a 10 per cent universal tariff in place for most countries. Trump said the 90-day pause would give countries time to negotiate a deal. The president said if countries didn't comply he would simply set tariff rates himself. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this' and called the lower court's decision 'judicial overreach.' The appeal ruling will consider two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One included five American small businesses against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other stemmed from 12 states arguing against both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. At least seven lawsuits are challenging the tariffs. Lawyers for the businesses say IEEPA does not mention tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. They say Trump is misusing the statute. Lawyers for Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont argued that tariffs make U.S. trade policy dependent on Trump's whims. Thirty-three senators also filed an amicus brief — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — in the case, saying the duties would cause harm to small- and medium-sized businesses while also grabbing powers that should be assigned to Congress. 'Small businesses do not have cash-on-hand or capital reserves to pay the increased tariffs, nor can they quickly adapt to them by modifying supply chains,' it said. 'If they cannot pass on the tariff costs to consumers — which would create additional harms for… constituents — many face letting employees go or filing for bankruptcy. Even a few weeks of additional tariffs means small businesses will suffer irreparable harm.' Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store