By Louie Stout

Access Column Stimulates Comments About Juno Eagle Problems

Last week’s column mention about parking issues at the Juno access site stimulated comments from readers.

That column noted that a local angler suspected that lake residents were using the access as a parking lot for their residential guests. The trailer parking area was full of vehicles without trailers.

Well, that fired a few of you up enough to write and bring other factors into the discussion. Public access remains a hot button, especially north of the state line at Eagle and Juno lakes, two of the area’s most popular fishing lakes.

Here’s a little background:

A few years ago, the Michigan DNR spent some $180,000 at Juno “renovating” the access that not only eliminated some parking spots but narrowed the lot, making it difficult for boaters to negotiate. Spaces are confined and the lot offers very little turning radius. Because of that, vehicles and trailers have been damaged. It was poorly designed, obviously by someone who has never launched a boat or used a public access.

At Eagle, a dilapidated boat ramp owned by the county on the east shore offer no public parking except for along the road. A few years ago, the DNR bought land and developed plans to add a modern boat launch north of the existing launch. Despite township government approval, the lake association and residents have continued to fight the development of any new access in the legal system. The case currently awaits a DNR Department of Environmental Quality Judge’s court ruling, which at best, won’t happen until this fall. In the meantime, the public uses the DNR’s vacant grassy lot.

As you can see from these emails, access to those public lakes has become lightning rods:

Don’t forget kayakers!

I agree that the Juno Lake Public Access is small and has limited access. There are only 11 parking slots for trailers; a few are reserved for law enforcement and handicapped and there are only three parking slots for cars. And yes, I have seen local residents using the car slots at times.

I have lived two houses down from the Juno Lake Public Access for 28 years. I have noticed increased activity from people who enjoy kayaking which results in cars using the trailer parking areas. There also are many instances where one or two cars of people will meet up with a boating angler. There are also bank fishermen who use the access.

When the lot is full, people park in grassy areas, law enforcement and handicap spots and even along the road. Some will make arrangements to park down at the H2O tackle store. The only time the access area has extra room is usually during severe weather or during weekday hours.

The Juno Lake public access is pretty poor to fit all the requirements necessary to please everyone.

- Tim Ackerson

You’re right that the Juno access is poorly designed and it’s true that kayakers car-top their boats and use parking spaces, and rightly so. However, the angler who raised the question last week said he didn’t see any kayakers on the lake that day. And he was in the lot at 5:45 a.m.

What is taking so long?

I don’t understand why the Eagle Lake ramp is taking so long to develop. Since there is already parking there, why can’t the DNR at least upgrade the existing ramp temporarily?

- Dave Smith

The county owns the existing ramp, not the DNR. It is badly in need of repair, but people are still using it and parking in the DNR’s lot to the north. It will remain that way while the access proposal is being contested by lake residents.

The DNR rarely, if ever, loses these cases and has assured access supporters that it’s in for the long haul. Unfortunately, this battle will continue as long as the lake residents continue to fund the legal fight. The DNR has no expense since it is using its own staff of lawyers.

What are you smoking?

Interesting that you are making an argument (although unintended I’m sure) supporting the position of the Eagle Lake residents you’ve vilified in the past. I’m referring to your concern about public access parking being utilized by individuals who aren’t boating.

If you recall a group of Eagle Lake residents formed an LLC (I was not a contributor to this effort) and purchased the old Dock property after a developer lost the land to foreclosure and the DNR attempted to buy it. While there may be people on the lake who don’t appreciate the fishermen, I’ve not heard any criticism about them or their activity. This lake has been fished for years and I don’t see that recreational boating has been harmed in any way.

However, the initial proposal for the Dock property included a large parking area, and while much of it was designated for cars with trailers, residents were certain these areas would be used by non-boating individuals - although doubtful by lake residents and/or their guests - and thus create a hazard with adults, children and pets crossing Eagle Lake Road.

With the DNR purchase of the lot to the immediate north of the Dock property, travel has become so hazardous with pedestrian crossings that most of the lake residents avoid Eagle Lake Road. I suppose you might argue that the attempt to stop the development of a new boat launch has contributed to the problem but that ignores the Michigan court ruling(s) designating the water’s edge for public use.

I find it hard to define a new large boat launch as public use when it benefits such a small segment of the public and bans all others. And to suggest that the DNR be contacted when a violation of parking rules occurs is almost laughable. You might want to check the content of your pipe.

--Judy Kukla

Eagle is a public lake and the public has a right to enjoy it. We agree on that.

However, there has always been a traffic hazard at the existing county boat launch. The truth is that the proposed parking lot would accommodate fewer trailered vehicles than what is available now in the DNR’s vacant lot (that awaits development while being contested in courts), plus the proposed ramp would be extended away from the road so that traffic wouldn’t be hindered as it is now when boaters use the county ramp and block traffic while launching and loading boats.

Also, the proposed site would utilize about the same amount of shoreline space as the existing ramp, and would provide more than sufficient room for non-boaters to swim on the east beach.

They parked along the road before the DNR purchased the land for the boating access site. The proposed plan calls for some non-trailer parking spots as well.

Anglers who don’t live on the lake have no issue with the non-boating public, but it’s interesting that some lake residents who tried to prevent the public from using the east shore swimming area before the DNR bought the site now champion their cause and argue that the DNR plan will prohibit public beach access, which is not the case at all.