Seaplane advocates tried again to make inroads with the legislature to land the floating aircraft on the public waters in Colorado Thursday.

The state and national seaplane pilots associations made their case to a fairly reptive interim Water Resources Review Committee, a panel of lawmakers that reviews possible legislation for the session that starts in January.

Colorado is the only state to ban seaplanes from landing on public waters.  The pilots haven’t had much luck in the last two sessions, however.

Last year, a bill to create a, ahem, pilot project to allow planes to land in two designated state parks, to assess them until 2020, died in its first Senate committee hearing, despite lots of conditions on the participating aircraft.

The lakes would have been chosen by the state Division of Parks and Wildlife and ones where motorboats are allowed. Pilots also would have to have their boats inspected for invasive aquatic species from other states and communicate with park personnel before landing on the lake.

In three hours of testimony last April, opponents, led by environmentalists and water districts, said the planes were still too risky as a carrier of aquatic hitchhikers that could imperil Colorado’s waters.  None of the opponents showed up Thursday, but there is not yet a bill to debate.

In 2016 a bill to allow the planes on public waters failed in its initial committee hearing in the House.

Steve McCaughey, executive director of the national Seaplane Pilots Association, said flyers want a ruling based on facts instead of dire supposition.

Planes can battle invasive aquatic species as easily as boats do, and concerns about planes hitting boats worries about something that isn’t supported, he said.

McCaughey said that in Colorado last year 12 boaters were killed, none of them involving seaplanes (which makes sense, given they’re outlawed on public waters), but nationwide in 2016 only four seaplane pilots were killed, and none of them hit a boat, he said.

“We can’t make policy based on assumptions that seaplanes are hazardous,” he said. “We have to use data.”

Legislators asked questions about the economic impact of the seaplanes, which could be significant for local lakeside communities, as they have been in other states, McCaughey said, citing examples.

Planes wouldn’t choose busy lakes, or those above 8,000 feet, because of the challenges altitude presents to seaplanes, he said. That would rule out many of the state’s most popular lakes, including Lake Granby and Lake Dillon, lawmakers on the committee noted.

“The heck with them,” said Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, who said he would love to see the planes landing on lakes in northeast Colorado.

Sen. Kerry Donovan, D-Vail, sounded skeptical, telling the pilots to work with those who might oppose them next year.

She told the associations to convince the state’s river districts, as well as the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife.

“That’s going to be a critical stakeholder, in addition to the state parks, for you to get something through in the next session,” Donovan said.

Pilot John Mellema said told the committee he got certified to fly seaplanes just because he heard Colorado might start allowing them.

“It’s something I’ve wanted to do as long as I’ve wanted to fly, which is 20 years,” Mellema said.

He added, “It’s more fun that the law will allow, so we can’t do it in Colorado.”

New Mexico proposed a ban in 2012, after seaplane opponents made similar arguments about public safety and aquatic species. The state dropped the proposal during its rulemaking process, citing opposition to the ban.