fbpx

Motoring on Water

The debate over a proposal to curtail motorized use on portions of the Flathead, Stillwater and Whitefish rivers

By Rob Breeding

Years ago, when I worked at a small weekly newspaper in the Bitterroot Valley, some anglers brought a photo into the office that showed a dude riding up the Bitterroot River on his Jet Ski. The rider seemed oblivious to the fly line that stretched out in front of him.

This was the 1990s, and personal watercraft were just gaining a toehold in Montana. The Bitterroot is a small river, just right for floating, but not the sort of place it makes much sense to launch a boat with a prop on the business end. That’s especially so in the Darby area, where a local float boat guiding industry was still establishing itself.

We ran the photo, despite its somewhat sketchy authenticity, which caused a bit of a sensation. A short while later, new regulations prohibiting motorized watercraft were established on the Bitterroot. Still, boats with motors of up to 20 horsepower are allowed from Oct. 1 to Jan. 31 to accommodate duck hunters in a season when guided fishing trips are rare.

For the Bitterroot, that always seemed a fair deal. Other than stretches at the lower end near its confluence with the Clark Fork, the Bitterroot is generally too skinny to run a prop boat anyway.

I put in at Darby with my drift boat once, when the gauge at that end of the river was reading about 800 cubic feet per second. We slammed hard into a number of riffles, and had to hop out and line the boat through other shallow stretches.

There are plenty of places that wouldn’t happen in the lower reaches, where some folks still prowl for ducks in motorized skiffs. But on the southern end, there’s no real motorized boat season, especially since the Bitterroot’s abundant root wads make it unsafe to float until high water is over.

The Missoula-based Backcountry Hunters and Anglers recently floated a proposal to curtail motorized use on portions of the Flathead, Stillwater and Whitefish rivers in the valley. While there’s probably merit in monitoring the situation so that the responsible public agencies can step in if conflicts arise, I think the group is out ahead of the public on this one.

I don’t know the Stillwater and Whitefish rivers all that well, but the forks of the Flathead are another matter. I’m a bit of a watercraft Luddite, meaning I like my boats non-motorized, and, whenever possible, a wooden contraption I built myself.

That being said, I think both forks will take care of themselves. Big riffles mark both channels just upstream of where the forks come together at Blankenship, and most of the summer that’s going to be the upper reach of any motorized traffic, if it even makes it that far.

But cutting off motorized traffic all the way down to the Highway 35 bridge? That’s a little much in my book. A serious proposal might talk about restricting traffic upstream from, say, the confluence with the South Fork, but I’m not sure even that’s needed. I seldom float downstream of Blankenship, but when I have I’ve never seen a motorized boat of any kind.

The strong public reaction against the proposal is a good sign that this isn’t an issue Fish, Wildlife and Parks needs to act on. Hearings in Kalispell and elsewhere in the state were well attended, and the non-motorized crowd was badly outnumbered. If there were real problems that needed regulating, there would have been some demonstrated showing from supporters of the regs.

As for the Bitterroot, non-motorized was the right regulation for that river. I’m not sure the decision to run what might have been a staged photograph was the right one, but saving that river for floaters was a good call. As for the Flathead, and other rivers of its size, non-motorized proponents may someday have a case. But that day isn’t today.