Sand And Gravel Bottom: A rolling dock should only be used where it can roll without sinking into mud.

Gradual Slope: A gentle slope will be easier to guide the rolling dock in and out.

Changing Water Levels: On lakes that lower throughout the summer months, the rolling dock can be pushed out into deeper water as necessary.

Rock Free: Rolling docks handle best when the shoreline is free of sudden drop offs or large irregular rock piles.

Clearance: There should be enough room up on the shore to accommodate the rolling dock when it is pulled back for the winter. Areas with dense woods can make handling difficult.

Stationary Docks 

Stability: Stationary docks, when properly installed with adequate bracing in water depths up to 6’, are very sturdy for lounging, walking on, standing on and boarding boats.

Wind And Boat Chop: Provided the dock is set at a height above the maximum wave height, stationary docks will withstand large waves that pass underneath. For stationary docks that need to be set low in areas prone to chop, the perforated decking used in the

Feather-lite dock allows waves to pass up through.

Sand, Gravel And Rock Bottom: Stationary docks work best set up over sand, gravel or rock bottoms. This is especially important where spanning over large rocks that could cause damage to floating docks or obstruct the path of rolling docks.

This is the first of a 3 parts series designed to help you decide which type of dock is best suited for your waterfront situation.

Floating Docks

Large Dock Systems: Floating docks are easy to assemble over the water. This is especially important for systems that require many sections of dock, such as swim docks for youth camps and tie-up docks for marinas.

Fluctuating Waters: Floating docks are ideal in waters that fluctuate so that a constant height off the water is maintained.

Deep Water: Where stationary docks can be challenging to install in deep water (over 6 feet), floating docks are a breeze.

Mucky Silt Bottoms: Floating docks should be used in areas that have mud bottoms. Installing and removing docks on legs or wheels in deep mud can prove extremely difficult.

Wind Exposure: Since large pilings are rarely permitted in Maine lakes, securing a floating dock and the attached boats is often achieved with weights and chain under the end of the dock. For this reason along with added motion that comes with floating docks, they should not be used in areas that aren’t protected from prolonged high winds. Continuous chop combined with wind forces against the boat and dock could make anchoring difficult.

Please check back for the next segmaent of our series.

The Maine Department of Environmental Protection introduced a new rule in May of 2006, which limits residential docks on lakes in Maine to a maximum width of six feet, or no wider than it needs to be to provide boat access. At the core of the argument for this regulation is a belief that shading from the docks is somehow detrimental to our lakes. This regulation was never voted on by the legislature, but has been directly passed from the DEP to local code enforcement officers to uphold. The question then should perhaps be posed, do these new rules have a helpful or harmful effect on our lakes environment?

Anyone who has spent time around docks on the lakes can observe that fish typically hide and nest underneath docks. As a scuba diver, I have watched several species of fish in our lakes and observed that bass, white perch, yellow perch, pickerel and sunfish will even become territorial over the space  beneath a dock. Most other species stay in the deeper waters where it is cooler. Why, you might ask, would they do this? 

The answer lies in the sun, and solar heating of shallow waters. Shallow waters, especially with sandy bottoms, reflect light from the sun back up from the bottom, intensifying the collective solar thermal gain of the water mass above it. Fish need a cool place to nest and lay eggs. Eggs laid in warmer waters might cook. Thus, the fish species who lay eggs in shallow water need it to be shaded water, as well. 

Thirty years ago, when I moved to the southern Maine lakes region from the coast, I remember large undeveloped shorelines that often had tall trees overhanging the water. Shore erosion was common, and as a result, many tall trees would actually tip over into the water. Rope swings from some of these trees were a common sight.

Today, it is a completely different picture. While you are not allowed to cut large trees from the shoreline, erosion has taken away most of the larger trees and development has kept new trees from growing in their place. New lakefront residents make sure that new trees don’t grow up to block their lake view. Further to this loss of natural replenishment, the practice of riprapping  unstable banks to prevent erosion, has limited the number of new falling trees. While erosion is something shorefront owners don’t want, it used to be a natural way of forming habitats for fish and other aquatic life near the shore.

This is where the benefit of residential docks come in. During the warmer months of the year, when fish are spawning, residential docks replace the needed shade that would have come from fallen or towering trees. This is evidenced by the life present under most docks on the lake.

Now I’m sure that the new regulations from the DEP were founded with good intention, but according to a source in the DEP, they were founded on a feeling that shading was detrimental to our lakes, apparently not on any scientific evidence.  It would seem that a decision as significant as this should have some basis in science.

Another effect of this regulation may not be immediately apparent. Previous laws on the books prohibit any new on-shore platforms to allow shoreline vegetation to flourish and protect the banks from erosion. As long as waterfront owners had the ability to create a small sitting area over the water, this did not adversely affect anything. New waterfront owners, however, will play around the water. If they don’t have a space on their dock to enjoy their waterfront, they will instead trample the bank and cause further erosion. You can’t stop them from participating in waterfront activities, in part because they pay very high taxes to enjoy these benefits. Another scenario of waterfront activity is that the waterfront owner is forced to use their boat more, instead of spending time on the dock. This time spent in the water instead of around the water will result in putting more pollutants into the water, as well as a potential increase of  erosion, due to the attendant increase in boat wake and destructive wave action.

There is also a discriminatory aspect of this new regulation. The law requires that docks be no wider than necessary to “carry on the activity.” This has been widely interpreted by code officers as for boating only. This favors boat owners, and the activity of boating, over other popular activities that have much less environmental impact such as fishing, swimming, or just relaxing on the dock. Those who use docks for these other reasons will not be producing large waves that contribute to erosion, nor will they be spilling oil into our crystal clear waters.

When a beautiful summer day arrives, you can’t even safely water ski on the lakes in Southern Maine anymore because there are too many boats in the water. The chop that is produced by the random stirring of the water by hundreds of boats at a time has increased erosion and made it unsafe to go out in a smaller craft for fear of capsizing. This then drives the demand for larger boats. The lakes in Southern Maine have gotten so congested from excessive boat traffic, that it’s not safe anymore.

This new regulation also discriminates against shorefront residents. Commercial marinas have no size restriction, and many of them have grown out of control, pumping more and more boats into our small lakes. A few marinas have become giant parking lots on the water, taking more and more space each year. Some marinas even foster environments for partying and excessive alcohol consumption on the water. Many are weekenders who don’t own or rent real estate, they just party and then sleep on their boat. This would be fine if they did not pollute the water in the process, but it is happening. Frequent outbreaks of E Coli at our state park beaches are verifiable evidence of this. This practice also needs regulation if the public is to be protected.

For certain situations a width restriction of 6 feet may actually prove to be dangerous. In deeper water, for instance, a wider platform may be necessary to provide adequate stability. In rough waters such as Sebago Lake or Moosehead Lake, where waves can easily get to 4 or 7 feet, floating docks should be much wider than six feet to prevent people from falling off. A six foot wide dock riding over 7 foot waves is extremely tippy, and thus requires a common sense approach to matching the size with the conditions.

Regulation is necessary, but let’s take a more scientific approach to creating new laws to make sure they are actually protecting our environment. Demand the reversing of regulations that hurt our environment like the dock width restriction for residents in Chapter 1000 of the Maine Shoreland Zoning Act 38 M.R.S.A. sections 435-449.