Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 5
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 5-341 (2026)

Negligent operation of watercraft or water skis; restriction in operation of watercraft; violation; classification

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. No person shall operate a watercraft in a careless, reckless or negligent manner.

B. A person shall not operate a watercraft while allowing a person to ride on the gunwales, the transom or the decked over bow of a watercraft propelled by machinery operating in excess of wakeless speed except if:

1. That portion of the watercraft was designed and constructed for the purpose of carrying passengers at all speeds.

2. The watercraft is being maneuvered for anchoring, mooring or casting off moorings.

C. No watercraft shall be operated with a passenger or passengers on the bow in such a manner as to obstruct the view of the operator.

D. No person on water skis, a surfboard or a similar contrivance shall behave in a careless, reckless or negligent manner.

E. Except in case of emergency no person under the age of twelve years may operate a watercraft propelled by a motor of greater than eight horsepower unless the person's parent or legal guardian or at least one person who is eighteen years of age or older is present on the watercraft.

F. Except as provided in subsection E, it is unlawful for any person to allow another person under the age of twelve to operate a motor-powered watercraft.

G. A person violating subsection A, B, C or D is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2006–2006 · leading case: In re the Complaint of Fun Time Boat Rental & Storage, LLC, 431 F. Supp. 2d 993 (D. Ariz. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re the Complaint of Fun Time Boat Rental & Storage, LLC, 431 F. Supp. 2d 993 (D. Ariz. 2006). · cites it 2× “the issue, because the boat rental agreement required that only Osborne was to operate the boat, and (4) that it did not breach any duty to warn Gonzales about the danger of riding on the bow of the boat because the boat had a conspicuous warning label at each of its four…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.