Kansas committee hears bill to clarify seaplane operations on state waters
Loading...
Summary
Supporters told the Committee on Federal and State Affairs HB 2687 would recognize seaplanes as lawful aircraft on waters where motorized boats are allowed, removing state-level uncertainty and encouraging flight training, rescue operations and rural economic activity; the Department of Wildlife and Parks offered neutral testimony noting federal authorities and Corps rules often govern reservoirs.
House Bill 2687, a measure to clarify the legal status of seaplanes and other aquatic aircraft in Kansas, drew proponent testimony from pilots, flight instructors and aviation-business owners at a Committee on Federal and State Affairs hearing.
Kyle, committee staff, told lawmakers the bill would "prohibit any governmental agency that owns, controls, or has jurisdiction over waters of the state from prohibiting the takeoff, landing, or operation of an aquatic aircraft" in areas where boats or vessels are permitted, and would prevent agencies from charging permits or fees for such operations. Kyle also noted existing administrative regulations and federal authority — for example, a Department of Wildlife and Parks regulation (KAR 115-8-13), state statute citations, FAA rulemaking, and Army Corps restrictions that currently limit or condition aquatic aircraft operations.
Proponents said unclear or patchwork rules have effectively limited seaplane use. Representative Angel Roser, a student pilot and bill proponent, said the bill "affirms that seaplanes are lawful aircraft in Kansas, and it removes unnecessary regulatory uncertainty that currently prevents access to otherwise suitable water landing sites." Jared Gerritsen of Gerritsen Aviation and Justin Caletti, a flight instructor and general manager at Billard Airport, testified the bill would allow flight schools to offer seaplane ratings in-state, grow aviation-related small businesses, boost rural fuel sales and support search-and-rescue and firefighting operations.
Carrie Gooch, an aviation enthusiast from Wichita, said Kansas law is "not very clear at all" about seaplane operation and that standardization would encourage tourism and new operations. Proponents repeatedly pointed to neighboring states that permit seaplane operations as models and emphasized that pilots already must meet FAA training, aircraft airworthiness and maritime-navigation rules.
Curtis Ward, chief counsel for the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, provided neutral testimony, saying the department "doesn't deal" routinely with seaplanes on federal reservoirs because Corps of Engineers or Bureau of Reclamation regulations and federal supremacy control those areas. He said the department had not regularly confronted seaplane landings on state-managed waters and framed the issue as primarily one involving federal reservoirs.
Committee members asked practical and safety questions, including how seaplanes would operate around recreational boat traffic and which bodies of water would be required to permit operations. Kyle and witnesses pointed to federal flight-altitude rules (FAR 91.119), Corps designation processes (36 CFR part 327) and the existing practice of treating seaplanes as vessels once on the water.
The committee closed the hearing on HB 2687 after accepting additional written testimony and moved on to other bills. The bill record includes proponent testimony from pilots and neutral comments from KDWP; no formal committee vote occurred at the hearing.
