On the related subjects of boats and invasive water species, it's hard to see how the legislature could have passed a bill that creates more annoyance and less beneficial effect than House Bill 2220.

The bill imposes a $5 annual fee on the "operators" of any "manually propelled" watercraft that measures 10 feet or longer. Most canoes and kayaks qualify and all driftboats qualify.

It also adds $5 to the biennial registration charge of motorboats. The bill forgets about sailboats altogether.

The money from these fees is supposed to go into a fund to fight the invasion of damaging species of aquatic weeds and shellfish.

These invasive species can become a huge and expensive problem, displacing native fish and clogging the intakes of power stations. The invasion needs to be fought, but this new law doesn't do it.

It authorizes the Marine Board, the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Agriculture to set up check stations to inspect recreational watercraft and recommend decontamination. But there's nothing in it to require inspections, especially at the state line where they might do some good against the invaders like the quagga mussel and New Zealand mud snails.

The Marine Board wanted something more effective: Border inspection stations where all boats being trailered into the state would be checked. But this was rejected on the grounds that the constitution forbids it. What the constitution forbids, according to the attorney general's office, is stops that can lead to criminal sanctions and are conducted based on no probable cause. Surely the situation is different with boats being brought in from states where aquatic invaders have gained a foothold.

But HB 2220 calls for no criminal punishment at all. It calls for civil penalties for anyone knowingly bringing invasive species to Oregon. And as for being caught without the proper boating permit, the offense is a Class D violation, the least serious kind, for which the fine is $90.

So if the fees for boating permits bring in enough money, border inspection stations would be the way to go. Voluntary inspection stations scattered here and there around the state won't do nearly as much good because there are so many place boaters can go.

The bill drafters could not make up their mind how to administer the $5 free requirement. One section says the fee is on the operator. Another says the fee is for the boat. And anyway, who is the operator of a two-man canoe? If both are handling paddles, do both need to pay the state five bucks?

The permit requirement takes effect Jan. 1, when most canoes are safely stored away. But before the next boating season, this law needs to be fixed. (hh)