(CT) Registration Requirements Poor Excuse for Homeland Security

Connecticut House Representative Peter Panaroni introduced surprise legislation (HB 5164) to require boater registrations and permits in the name of homeland security. Boaters responded quickly and attended a hearing on the bill on February 19th. Following the hearing the bill was declared dead.

Here's the inside scoop as reported by Wayne Smith, President of the ConnYak Club, on how boater's fought to prevent losing their freedom to boat in the name of homeland security.

Hi everybody,

A contingent of 17 individuals, including myself, the owner of the Small Boat Shop in Norwalk, the owner of Collinsville Canoe & Kayak, the CT River oar and paddle club, and a lobbyist from the CT Sportsmen's association (Who was awesome), and other concerned and dedicated paddlers attended the public hearing today. Thank you one and all!!!!!!!!!

I'll say it as politely as I can -- the bill was a total travesty. It was introduced by Rep Peter Panaroni of Branford (Peter.Panaroni@po.state.ct.us) when the committee realized that we were all intent on speaking, Rep Panaroni told us that it was a "Homeland Security" issue, and was shocked that so many of us showed. He then asked if we would leave if he dropped or modified the bill. We said "No". Sen Ciotto (co-chair) then asked if we would appoint 3 representatives to speak for all. We said "No", and made it clear we were not leaving until all had spoken. One other member of the committee (I forget his name, and if anyone knows it, please let me know, I want to thank him) came to our defense, and said we all had the right to be heard. Sen Ciotto agreed, albeit reluctantly.

Rep Panaroni explained that there were residents of the Thimble Islands who were concerned that terrorists would land on their property in kayaks, and blow up their multi-million dollar homes, and that forcing us all to register our boats would somehow stop that from happening. For those of you who live in Connecticut, the word "Greenwich" immediately came to my mind. Dave Sinish of Collinsville canoe replied that the truck that tried to blow up the WTC in 1993 was legally registered. So was the truck that Timmy McVeigh used in Oklahoma City, and all 3 planes that were used on Sept 11th were, too. So, what is the point? No answer.

I gave my speech, as did everyone else, and Jay Babina went last, and laid it all on the table in plain english. Rep Panaroni got defensive, and then changed his reason to "We need to be able to find out who did it, and registration will allow that". Small solace to the families, bud, for the deed is done at that point.

He then asked us if we would accept a watered-down version of the bill. The unanimous answer was "No compromises". The co-chairs of the committe asked us how we were able to get so many people on short notice, and we said "The internet". They didn't seem surprised. The co-chairs also seemed to agree with us after about the first hour of testimony.

Jay and Phil Babina ran into one of the Senators on the committee later, and he told them "It's dead", and commended us on our presentation.

However, I get the impression that Rep Panaroni isn't through with us yet. We need to keep him under the microscope, and show up in numbers any time this happens again. And I'm saddened to say I believe it will, and sooner than we think.

Thank you all who showed, and may we be able to double that number if we have to do this again! And we all owe Jean Trapani our deepest gratitude for sounding the alarm, and to Dennis McNeil for doing so much legwork for us.

Warmest regards,

Wayne Smith
President, ConnYak

When American Whitewater learned of the bill on February 19th, we immediately began building a coalition of interests to examine the bill. Dave Jenkins at the ACA quickly learned that the State's Department of the Environment which manages rivers and boating knew nothing about the bill and were as mystified as we were about it. In calls to the State House and the Department, we were unable to determine who even introduced the bill.

Wayne's story emphasizes the need for, and effectiveness of, strong local involvment and action. The boaters that attended this hearing did an awesome job, and deserve a big pat on the back for so ably representing the boating community.

While homeland security is a very serious issue, it is important for each of us to guard against the loss of our freedoms through ineffective and non-utile pursuits of security.

Lest you think that this is a limited case of using homeland security as a way of banning or limiting boating, think again. American Whitewater has been alerted to and is working on several boat closures around the country that were supposedly made in response to homeland security, but appear to have been kneejerk reactions rather than carefully considered. Examples span the nation from the Sultan in Washington State to the Potomac in Washington, DC. This example in Connecticut is merely the latest and broadest in scope.

---

HB 5164

H.B. No. 5164 (RAISED) AN ACT REQUIRING THE REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN VESSELS.
To require the registration of all vessels less than nineteen and one-half feet in length which are not motorboats and all vessels propelled only by oars or paddles.

General Assembly
Raised Bill No. 5164
February Session, 2002
LCO No. 749
Referred to Committee on Transportation

Introduced by:(TRA)

AN ACT REQUIRING THE REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN VESSELS.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

Section 1. Subsection (a) of section 15-143 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective July 1, 2002):

(a) Vessels of the following classes are not required to be numbered by this state:

(1) Motorboats which have a valid marine document issued by the United States Coast Guard, provided the owner of any such vessel used upon the waters of this state for more than sixty days in any calendar year shall be required to comply with the registration requirements in section 15-144;

(2) vessels owned in countries other than the United States temporarily using the waters of the state;

(3) vessels owned by the United States, a state or a political subdivision of a state which are used in the performance of governmental functions;

(4) vessels used exclusively as ships' lifeboats;

(5) vessels belonging to any class which the Commissioner of Environmental Protection exempts upon finding that the numbering of such vessels does not materially aid in their identification; provided, the commissioner shall not exempt any such class of vessels which is subject to the provisions of the federal Boat Safety Act of 1971 and which has not been exempted therefrom under the provisions of Subsection (b) of Section 19 of said act; and

(6) vessels principally used in another state for which valid, effective certificates of number were awarded by the United States or by such other state pursuant to the provisions of the federal Boat Safety Act of 1971; provided, the owner of a vessel used upon the waters of this state for more than sixty days in any calendar year shall be required to comply with the registration requirements in section 15-144.

This act shall take effect as follows:

Section 1
July 1, 2002

Statement of Purpose:

To require the registration of all vessels less than nineteen and one-half feet in length which are not motorboats and all vessels propelled only by oars or paddles.

Back to top