back a page

Big Hole, Beaverhead River Recreation Rules Adopted

On Thursday, May 12, 2005, the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Commission adopted Big Hole and Beaverhead recreation management rules. Following Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks recommendations that closely aligned with recommendations from the Citizen's Advisory Committee, the commission:

In a significant departure from the Citizen's Advisory Committee recommendations and following department advice, the commission decided against opening the Beaverhead stretch from Hwy 91 South (Tash) Bridge to Selway Bridge to float outfitting. The department relied on one of the rules for statewide river recreation management that stated:

"When possible, the development of management plans must be coordinated with the planning processes of state, tribal, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over a river or a reach of a river"

and pointed out that an addendum to the Beaverhead County Resource Plan called for a stretch of the Beaverhead to be set aside for "the exclusive use and enjoyment of the unguided and unoutfitted public."

FOAM was told that the Beaverhead County Resource Plan was covered under this rule, even though the county is neither a state, tribal nor federal agency with jurisdiction over any part of the Beaverhead river. We wondered if the department would give the same credence to a resource plan adopted, say, by the Crow Tribe for the Bighorn river.

And, the commission retained the nonresident float angling restrictions on both rivers. FOAM had argued against this restriction on the Big Hole river, using as justification another river recreation management rule:

"Management plans may not differentiate based solely on the residency of the river user unless the commission determines the best available data indicate that amount of use by residents or nonresidents is a primary contributor to an identified problem."

In spite of FOAM supplying departmental data that showed nonresident use, floating or not, had not been the majority use pattern for five years, the commission agreed with the department's representative, Regional Supervisor Pat Flowers, that nonresident use ranging from 40 to 50% made them primary contributors to the 'crowding' problem. Worse, the commission agreed with the department's logic that "a sector of use (a user group) does not have to be the majority of use to be a primary contributor to a crowding problem." We wonder what other factors were used by the department and commission to frame nonresident floating users as primary contributors when their numbers alone don't justify controls.

A review of the public comments and the department's responses yields a partial answer:

According to the department's comments, the statewide rules say,

'Planning and management of Montana's river systems should provide for and conserve a full variety of recreation experiences and assure that river recreation historically enjoyed by people in Montana is recognized.'

and

'Nonresidents should have reasonable and equitable opportunities compared to other recreational users to enjoy Montana's resources,' and that 'reasonable and equitable' as applied to nonresidents means recreational use that fairly considers the interests of all types of recreational users, and is not intended to mean that each type of recreational user must have the exact same share of use in terms of the timing, amount, and location of use.'

FOAM questioned the new River Recreation Coordinator about this last phrase, 'each user need not have the same share of use', wondering if nonresidents would be the only group treated unequally. His response suggested FOAM was wrong and possibly paranoid. Since the commission has reasoned that nonresident use demonstrably below 50% still requires controls, we think we were right to question this concept.

The commission-backed rules will go through a Secretary of State review, then become effective June 16, 2005.

 

fishing   applications   faq   news   about   contact