Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lake Wood, Maine-any substitute?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lake Wood, Maine-any substitute?

    Dear All:
    Many former users of Lake Wood in Acadia National Park are, I'm sure, still grieving over its loss as a hassle-free place for skinny-dipping and nude sunbathing. Will there ever be any place like it in Maine ever again?
    Some background... In a post 8-26-06 I shared my research in the Hancock County, Maine Registry of Deeds on the transfer of land around Lake Wood to Acadia National Park. The purchase was made April 25, 1995. The nude use of the lake was certainly well known to ANP administration, as it had been customary since at least the 1940's, according to local lore. This traditional use continued to be tolerated under ANP ownership, in the administration of Superintendent Paul Heartel, many years after the sale.
    The public generally uses the North shore which is immediately adjacent to the parking area. The nudists used the Eastern shore, which is about a 5-10 minute walk beyond it. They were not visible from the North shore as the terrain screens them from view.
    Out of the blue in summer 2004, with no public warning and no posted signs, ANP rangers began persecuting naturists. The news media parroted the official reasoning given out by ANP administration, namely rampant drug use and underage drinking.
    This did not agree at all with my own observations. In my visits the prior dozen years I noted it was self-policing. Users kept it clean. Drug use was nearly non-existent. It was even exceptional to see people with a beer. Children were never in attendance, dogs were rare. The few clothed people that encountered the place by accident always seemed curious and amused, rather than offended. All in all it used to be Maine’s most reliably peaceful place to bake one’s buns in the Sun and swim nude with sympathetic company.
    My speculation is that it coincided with the arrival of a new Superintendent in May 2003. Sheridan Steele transferred from Gunnison National Park in Colorado. It seemed to be off to a good start as his personal mission, reported in state newspapers was "to work with the staff and community and help tailor a strategy unique to Acadia." His main stated goals were to: address problems of overuse, reverse degradation of natural resources, strategize for reduction of air pollution and to advocate for increased federal funding for ANP.
    Soon afterward I noted that parking along the roadside near Bubble Pond became prohibited and boulders were set in place to enforce the new rule, somewhat ugly, but I thought nothing more about it. Then ranger patrols on the hiking trails became more frequent -- at face value an increased attention to safety, but certainly a departure from the easygoing atmosphere of Acadia. There were a number of other signals however that did not seem to be welcoming developments either. My underlying sense was that a new, more severe tone was set for how ANP users would be treated.
    It therefore was no surprise to hear about the (alleged-but in front of many witnesses) Ranger brutality on one of the attendees at an annual end-of-season outdoor gathering of the restaurant staffers of an ANP consessionaire. Fyi:


    I am avoiding potentially libelous statements here, but can certainly observe that the relationship between users of Acadia and the enforcement personnel had changed quite a bit in the last five years and not, I purport, for the better. Perhaps there will be a positive change under a new Chief Executive in Washington next year.

  • #2
    That's really sad to hear.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes the situation at Lake Wood is truly unfortunate. There is Richmond Sauna, but it is not the same as a natural beach.

      Comment


      • #4
        I just stumbled on this old thread, I hadn't read it before.
        I am one that still grieves over its loss. Lake Wood was my very first experience with social nudity. I discovered it around 1995, and went there every summer up to its rude closing.
        And unless I'm mistaken, Sheridan Steele is STILL there. I don't think there's any hope of the good ol' days returning there until he leaves.
        But I have to say, the last few years before it closed, sexual activity was becoming a problem. It was turning more and more into a gay cruising spot, and the regulars who kept the area policed of inappropriate activity started leaving. Steele felt the best way to wipe this problem out was to close it to all nudity.
        Still, it would be great to see it become a skinny-dipping spot again.

        Comment


        • #5
          The problem is that the National Park System is gradually eroding any nude recreation in its jurisdiction by enforcing local laws.

          And where local laws are NOT enforced or in place, they put their own regulations in place. Exhibit A = Cape Cod National Seashore.

          Does inappropriate behavior take place at these beaches - a general statement, yes. Do nudists do a good job of keeping the place free of that stuff? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

          "Perhaps there will be a positive change under a new Chief Executive in Washington next year." -- that statement was made in 2008. For people who are concerned about the environment - yes, the change was good news. But for nudists, it wasn't -- because, historically, these big environmental groups have often acted AGAINST the interests of nudists.

          The infamous "piping plover" card is played whenever these groups want to take over and shut down a beach .... not just nude beaches - ANY beaches. And unfortunately, the first beaches they put in their crosshairs for closure are the ones where nudists go to.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by usuallylurk View Post
            The problem is that the National Park System is gradually eroding any nude recreation in its jurisdiction by enforcing local laws.... Does inappropriate behavior take place at these beaches - a general statement, yes. Do nudists do a good job of keeping the place free of that stuff? Sometimes yes, sometimes no... historically, these big environmental groups have often acted AGAINST the interests of nudists....
            Three thoughts come to mind. Maybe naturists should be systematically working closely with environment groups -- we have a lot in common. Maybe there is an good argument in these cases to institute a "naturist permit" -- apply for it, behave appropriately or lose it on an individual basis -- the Park Service tends to be permit-oriented. Maybe naturists should speak up locally -- it is easy to institute regulations against anonymous potential-troublemakers, but tough to be draconian against polite neighbors you know.

            Comment


            • #7
              Agde, I don't think you understand. These environmental groups work against nearly ANYONE. Up here, they have successfully blocked most human access to the Plum Island Parker River Refuge, which was used for skinny-dipping for decades. They were directly responsible for the closure of Moonstone Beach. They had influence over the decision of the NPS to shut off the Cape Cod National Seashore to nude swimming. And most of the time - when a beach is used for nude recreation - the environmental groups are the first ones out there saying "we have to close that beach because of the piping plover endangered species. Yeah, that's it - piping plover, that's the ticket..."

              They would never be on our side. And they are so large, the nudist movement can't fight them, let alone turn them around.

              Comment


              • #8
                Why do you think they are singling out, or focusing their attention, on the nudists more than others? Why would environmentalists be so against nudity? Do they really think we're more of a threat to the environment, or is it something else?

                Comment


                • #9
                  The problem is that naturists tend toward out-of-the-way beaches and other areas which are also more environmentally pure (less of a footprint by man). The enviro-loons want to do anything they can to prevent man from making any kind of inroads in those places no matter who they inconvenience. They are not against nudists, they are against humans,

                  Bob S.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X