AUGUSTA – Mainers were granted the absolute right to use the state’s waters hundreds of years ago, but precisely how much municipalities can limit access to public lakes and ponds remains controversial.

Legislators held a public hearing Thursday on a bill that would re-establish a formal process that towns would have to follow if they want to ban certain types of activities on “great ponds,” defined as covering 10 acres or more.

In recent years, towns have increasingly sought to ban the use of some powerboats – particularly the personal watercraft that are collectively referred to by the brand-name Jet Ski – on local ponds.

Sometimes local residents are concerned about conflicts with swimming or fishing, or simply unhappy about noise levels. And as Jen Burns of Maine Audubon testified Thursday, recreational activities can have dire impacts on wildlife habitat. Loons frequently die from collisions with boats, and intrusion into quiet coves can keep the birds from successfully hatching their chicks, she said, citing several recent studies that point to personal watercraft as a major problem.

Some years ago, the Legislature created a task force to handle this growing concern, then, on the group’s advice, passed a law to create a formal process of limiting access to great ponds that involved cities and towns, legislators and the state Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. However, the law included a sunset provision, so legislators are currently faced with the same free-for-all that raised the issue in the first place, explained Rep. Matt Dunlap, D-Old Town. Dunlap sponsored LD 1675, the bill that would bring back the formal process, with a few “improvements.”

Today, a legislator from one town could introduce a bill seeking to ban personal watercraft on a pond without ever holding hearings in his community, or speaking with neighboring towns that share the same pond, Dunlap said.

Dunlap’s bill “front-loads” the process, requiring towns communicate with their residents and with each other before bringing a proposal to Augusta, where it would eventually face a public hearing.

“The public gets at least one bite of the apple,” Dunlap said. “Generally, [the process] was pretty successful.”

Representatives from Maine Audubon, the Maine Congress of Lakes Associations and the Sen. George Mitchell Center for Watershed Research at the University of Maine all spoke in favor of the bill.

DIF&W Commissioner Roland “Dan” Martin spoke in opposition, however, arguing that Dunlap’s bill gives his department too much responsibility for the often controversial proposals to limit recreational use of state waters, and not enough opportunity to comment on whether the proposals interfere with fish and game laws.

“It would increase the burden on my staff, answering questions that ought to be addressed by the Legislature,” Martin said.

A spokesman for the personal watercraft industry also mounted a passionate argument against the bill, calling it unfair and discriminatory. The process proposed by Dunlap gives nonresident users of lakes and ponds, like camp owners who live out-of-state, little opportunity to comment on proposed restrictions, he said.

“This bill is nothing more than an invitation for communities to ban personal watercraft on various bodies of water,” said Ralph Pears, the Bath-based lobbyist. “There is simply no justification for this kind of discrimination.”

The Inland Fisheries and Wildlife legislative committee has scheduled a work session on the bill for Jan. 29 in Room 206 of the Cross State Office Building in Augusta.