PROVIDENCE — Should the state’s ports, piers, docks, wharfs and marinas remain the exclusive province of fisherman, boat builders and shipping and industrial businesses, or is there room for more?

Legislation proposed by Rep. David Caprio, D-Narragansett, would guarantee that “working waterfronts” — which it defines as any property along a navigable body of water — will be used only by “water dependent” industries — those that require direct access to waterways.

Introduced late last week, the bill was considered by the House Committee on Environment and Natural Resources last night. At least 16 individuals and organizations spoke in support of the bill and 5 spoke in opposition. The bill was held for further study.

The implications of the briefly worded measure, titled The Rhode Island Working Waterfronts Protection Act, are wide-ranging, and it has elicited interest from Galilee to Providence.

On one hand, its basic purpose –– protecting the traditional industries of ports and the blue-collar jobs they provide –– has long been championed in Rhode Island, which has seen its working ports dwindle in favor of residential and other commercial developments.

“There are just three working waterfronts left: Quonset [North Kingstown], Melville Marine [Portsmouth], and Allens Avenue [Providence]... We can’t continue to leak these traditional jobs,” said Keith W. Stokes, executive director of the Newport County Chamber of Commerce.

On the other hand, the bill, as worded, might affect much more than those businesses.

Kenneth Orenstein, executive director of the Heritage Harbor Museum, a planned hotel and museum of Rhode Island in a former power plant along the Providence River, said he worries that the legislation would prevent his $150-million project from going through.

“These regulations will go right into the heart of downtown Providence. It’ll affect every inch of Rhode Island from Warwick, East Providence, Pawtucket, Bristol and Newport. This is horrendously overboard,” said Patrick Conley, a prominent Providence developer with property on the Allens Avenue waterfront.

Municipal officials fear that the legislation also would put significant authority in the hands of the Coastal Resources Management Council, a state regulatory agency, at the expense of local jurisdiction.

“At a time when we need to be breaking down barriers for doing business in Rhode Island, this legislation creates new restrictions that will discourage new investment activity up and down the Rhode Island coast,” Providence Mayor David N. Cicilline said in a statement. “We need to make smart investments to make our ports more effective by making them more competitive, not less.”

While voicing support for the intent of the bill, members of the House panel voiced concerns that the bill’s language is too broad.

Committee members suggested the state consider developing policies to encourage municipalities to allow maritime uses that directly benefit the state, but not necessarily the host community.

Caprio said he filed the bill to ensure that his hometown port of Galilee remains a working fishing port.

Galilee, while home to two state beaches, a number of restaurants, bars and motels and a departure point for the Block Island ferry, remains one of the busiest fishing centers on the East Coast, Caprio said.

“It is a multifaceted port, but at the cornerstone is the fishing industry,” he said.

A similar piece of legislation was filed late last year by then Sen. Paul E. Moura, an East Providence Democrat, but it did not go anywhere.

Caprio’s bill is modeled on a Massachusetts law, the Designation of Port Areas Act, which creates special zones for maritime industries within designated ports, including Gloucester Inner Harbor, Mystic River, South Boston, and New Bedford-Fairhaven. Massachusetts’ Department of Environmental Protection and the Office of Coastal Zone Management are the regulatory agencies under the law.

pmarcelo@projo.com