Waldo Lake motorboat ban to stand.

Byline: Diane Dietz The Register-Guard

In future years, the silence at Waldo Lake may be broken only by the hungry whine of mosquitos.

The U.S. Forest Service decided Monday to stick with its decision to ban motorboats, generators and chain saws from the shores and shoals of the pristine lake 20 miles east of Oakridge.

Eugene resident Steven Stewart had appealed the ban in June, arguing - in part - that it would block elderly and disabled people from using the lake. He appealed in the name of his late father, Stub Stewart, a Eugene timber company owner and state lawmaker, who enjoyed an annual motor tour around the lake up into his 90s.

But Forest Service appeals officer Jose Linares wasn't swayed by the argument.

"Visitors with physical limitations still have the opportunity to enjoy the lake via watercraft; just not watercraft with internal combustion engines," he wrote in the decision that ultimately was signed by Calvin Joyner, the Portland-based deputy regional forester.

Joyner's decision marks the end of administrative appeals. But Stewart said in a statement on Monday that he's prepared to go the next step - to federal court - to overturn the motorboat ban.

The Forest Service has been considering for nearly two decades banning gas-powered engines from the lake. In 2000, in response to the Stewart family's objections, the Forest Service withdrew its ban proposal, which the agency had spent years developing.

This time, nothing will change immediately. The Forest Service plans to spend two years educating boaters about the ban before it begins enforcing the no-gas-engine policy.

Ban proponents said they were pleased by the agency's Monday announcement.

"This will be greeted by 95 percent of the lake users as the correct decision," said Glen Love, a retired English professor who has used the lake for 35 years. "Since electric motors are still permitted, the lake's many pleasures will still be available to the mechanized enthusiast."

Doug Heiken, a coordinator of the 5,000-member environmental group Oregon Wild, has tracked the ban proposal for years.

"The Forest Service is sticking up for one of the crown jewels of the Oregon Cascades," he said. "People have been calling for the end of motorboat use for years and we might finally see it happen. We've waited long enough to enjoy Waldo Lake in a quiet and peaceful way."

Heiken said he has talked with environmental attorneys about defending the Forest Service's decision against any court challenge. "There are a lot of people very interested in protecting the qualities of Waldo Lake," he said.

But Aaron Siegel, a building contractor and lifelong Eugene resident, said he regrets the loss of opportunity to cruise the lake in his motorboat.

"I've been going to Waldo since before there was a road there. I love the place as much as everybody else does," he said.

It's a pity other people can't tolerate the few gas-powered motorboats that use the lake now, he said. "It's like, get a grip: you drove up here, you paddle for 15 minutes and you're the first white person to see a tree?" he said.

In a statement via his attorney, Stewart said a principle is at stake.

The Forest Service incorrectly dismissed the argument that the Oregon State Marine Board - and not the Forest Service - is the proper body to regulate the use of the lake, he said.

"This case presents a legal question of great importance to all the people of Oregon. It regards who has the authority to regulate boating on Waldo Lake - the Forest Service or the people of Oregon. The people of Oregon have regulated the lake responsibly for years. The water quality and beauty of the lake is evidence of our responsible stewardship," he said.

Heiken said the state may control the banks and beds of the lake, but the Forest Service controls the surface.

"They're not really worried about who owns the lake," he said. "They're trying to find any legal lever they can get to allow motorboats to continue using the lake."

Scott Fitzwilliams, deputy at the Willamette National Forest, said the agency will watch for future litigation.

"We think we made a solid decision," he said. "If they decide to (sue), it's not with ill will or anything. It's part of the public process that's allowed."