Quit Waters Iniiative

[whiptail]

any one have Info on this sounds like traditionalists want to infringe on peoples rights to use motorized water crafts on 16 Rivers in Montana. The Local news Paper said this is up for public comment.   

[esox_xtm]

From your FWP folks:

Quiet Waters Proposed Rules

11/25/2016

A petition, known as the Quiet Water’s Initiative, was submitted to the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission this past spring by Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. The petition states Montana has experienced advanced motorized technology on its waterways, which has potentially opened up waters previously thought to be unusable by motorized water craft. At its regular May meeting, the Commission initiated rulemaking on the petition, stating, in part, the Commission should consider being proactive instead of reactive to the changes in recreation on Montana’s waterways to avoid conflicts and protect traditional and safe recreational uses. Public hearings will be held to obtain public comment.

•   Jan. 3 at the FWP Region 1 office, 490 N. Meridian Road, Kalispell at 6 p.m.
•   Jan. 4 at the FWP Region 2 office, 3201 Spurgin Road, Missoula at 6 p.m.
•   Jan. 5 at the FWP Region 3 office, 1400 S. 19th Ave., Bozemen at 6 p.m.
•   Jan. 9 at the FWP Region 5 office, 2300 Lake Elmo Drive, Billings at 6 p.m.
•   Jan. 11 at the FWP Region 4 office, 4600 Giant Springs Road, Great Falls at 6 p.m.
•   Jan. 11 at the FWP headquarters office, 1420 E. 6th Ave., Helena at 6 p.m.

[Golden Trout]

Will this make it so you cant drive snow machines or four wheelers on the lake at night time?  Or is this just about boats?

[whiptail]

no machines below high wtr mark.

[whiptail]

FISH and WILDLIFE
 COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
Meeting Date: 
May 12, 2016
Agenda Item:
 Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers Quiet Waters Initiative Petition
Division: 
Enforcement
Action Needed:
Final
Time Needed on Agenda for this Presentation
: 
30 Min
Background
:    The  Backcountry  Hunters  and  Anglers  (BHA)  submitted  a  petition  with  recommended 
restrictions on several major water systems in Montana stating, “each year a different type of watercraft or high
performance craft is introduced, threatening traditional uses or capable of penetrating previously quiet waters”
and that BHA seeks to “close the gaps between those current and potential uses that may
 be made possible by
emerging technologies”
Public Involvement Process & Results
:  Public comment has not been sought
 regarding the specific requests
in the petition
.
Alternatives and Analysis
:  The Commission is required to either deny the petition or initiate rulemaking.  If
the  Commission  denies  the  petition,  the  recreational  use  regulations  on  the
water  bodies
  listed  in  the  petition
will  remain  as  they  are
  currently.    If  the  Commission  initiates  rulemaking,  the  process  outlined  by  the 
Recreational  Use  rules  will  be  adhered  to  including  environmental  analysis,  development  of  a  management 
plan, and implementing the ma
nagement plan
.
Agency  Recommendation  &  Rationale
:    BHA  presents  recommendations  to  drastically  restrict  waterways 
without  demonstrating  any  necessity  to  protect  public  health,  public  safety,  public  welfare,  or  to  protect 
property and public resources.  A
common theme throughout the petition is the recommendation for no personal
watercraft or motorized watercraft claiming “potential safety issues”.  Safe operation of the personal watercraft,
motorboats, or any vessel is addressed in law.  A person may not operate a personal watercraft, motorboat, or
vessel in a reckless or negligent manner.  Montana Code Annotated §§23-
2-  523 and 23-
2-531. 
BHA has titled
the  petition  “Quiet  Waters  Initiative”  imply
ing  that  the  petition  is  an  objection  to  motorboats  strictly  on  the 
noise they produce.
Using the guidance and requirements established by statute and rule, the commission should deny the petition.   
Proposed  Motion
:    I  move  the  Commission  deny 
Backcountry  Hunters  and  Anglers
  petition  regarding  quiet
waters for the reasons stated by the department.
Looks like FWP rejected this plan, but our commission has adopted it after Back Country Hunters and Anglers went around FWP and straight to the commissioners.   

[bigsky]

Here is the link for the proposal. Everyone should educate themselves on it before voicing their opinion. The first time I heard of it is when some locals were saying "BHA is trying to close access to the Missouri". I then went and read up on it and that is clearly not the case.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/backcountryhunters/pages/2831/attachments/original/1476226083/Quiet_Waters_Proposal_MT_BHA.pdf?1476226083

I have mixed feelings. The only affected rivers that I have fished are the Missouri and the Yellowstone, and this initiative wouldn't change anything for me on those rivers. I e-mailed BHA and they said the purpose of the initiative is to stay ahead of technology, similar to when they fought to prevent the use of drones for hunting. As far as I can tell, most of the affected waters aren't big enough for a traditional boat to practically navigate. Picture yourself wade fishing in one of these small streams and then having an air boat come blowing upstream towards you. Like I said though, I have only fished the Missouri and Yellowstone, so I would like to hear from others that have more experience on these other watersheds before I send in my comments.

[fishnvaughn]

It sounds like to me they do not like personal watercraft. There are alot of people who fish off them and do not race around.I THINK A LITTLE RESTRICTION NOW WILL LEAD TO MORE  RESTRICTION LATER.

[FlynIcefish]

I agree, there is no need for more laws and restrictions. Why should their experience be more important than anybody elses? We do not need to outlaw the safe use of watercraft on montana waters. What's next? A boating restriction on the entire missouri? They have already proposed restricting all use of motorized craft of anything above 10hp on all of the missouri river's tributaries! And some of the missouri itself!

[njoy]

Having read the proposal and floating several of the waters named, this sounds just like a proposal that was voiced a couple of years ago by the guides and outfitters  on both the Mo. below Holter and the Yellowstone. I have not had a conflict on any of the rivers I have floated and there has been motor boats on several of them. I personally feel it is wrong to restrict someone else from enjoying our public areas unless they do it my way. Just my take on the topic.

[TJet Apprentice45]

There has been zero scientific data gathered, surveys completed or any fact gathering done to justify this proposal.  This is a power grab, anything they can do to make sure there is no motorized use on these sections.  Most of the sections mentioned are too small to boat most 99% of the year, but why are we letting a group with no scientific backing change the way we enjoy the rivers?  Hopefully we'll have a good turnout at the meetings with FWP and they can tell us why this is even being considered.  FWP's chief warden is against the proposal, but somehow it is still alive. Quote: "FWP chief warden Tom Flowers said FWP didn’t support the petition because there weren’t any conflicts on the proposed streams and the rule-making process is a lot of work for restrictions that FWP didn’t deem warranted."
Hopefully common sense will prevail.  Take a look at what BHA is really all about and who funds them.  https://www.greendecoys.com

[missoulafish]

Welcome to the era of emotion driven, non-scientific initiatives. Its not going to get any better until someone puts an end to the ability to use initiatives in the fashion that they are being used. Science>emotion

[SLIMMETT]

Please explain Science>emotion???

[esox_xtm]

I'm not gonna push an agenda one way or the other 'cause I'm on both sides of the fence. Just gonna share...

Hunted an island in Lake Superior pretty much my whole life. The Old Man went up first in '45. Special place. Stay in the farmhouse, feed the woodburner for both heat and cooking, go outside to "take care of business", take a wheelbarrow with 5 gallon buckets (metal ones) a quarter mile down the road to fetch water from the lake for cooking and remedial clean up. Shower? Huh?

We'd walk in to hunt, coupla miles and shoot some bucks and drag 'em back and hang 'em on the meatpole. Not a  big island but because we were willing, we pretty much had a couple sections all to ourselves.

Fast forward to the near past. Accommodations change, very comfortable. No more chasing water or crapping in the cold.  Land becomes public, ATVs, GPS, any moron with that pair can buzz in, beat us to all our spots without breaking a sweat, shoot our deer and drag 'em out, again, without breaking a sweat. Sigh....

I get the quiet water thing. Doesn't mean I necessarily agree with the grab, I just understand. I also hate jetskis buzzing around in circles while I'm trying to fish and enjoy a little peace and quiet. On the other hand, I got a performance fishing boat. Goes real fast. Probably annoys someone......

So. Where to draw the line?

[missoulafish]

Please explain Science>emotion???

Scientific data and facts should make policy, not emotion.

The anti trapping initiative that just failed is a perfect example.
Anti trapping organizations attempting to scare their constituents by telling them the forests aren't safe and that kids are going to get killed by traps. Another favorite is that they can't go into public ground because there are traps everywhere.
All lies meant to scare people into voting the way they wanted them to vote.

[esox_xtm]

Scientific data and facts should make policy, not emotion.

The anti trapping initiative that just failed is a perfect example.
Anti trapping organizations attempting to scare their constituents by telling them the forests aren't safe and that kids are going to get killed by traps. Another favorite is that they can't go into public ground because there are traps everywhere.
All lies meant to scare people into voting the way they wanted them to vote.

x2

[bigsky]

Like esox_xtm, I am on both sides of the fence. I fish for both walleyes and trout, from both jet boats and drift boats. I hope it doesn't become a walleye versus trout thing.

Here is the answer I got from BHA in regards to the Missouri in my area:

"Thanks for contacting us to get the straight scoop. You can be assured Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers has no proposal to restrict motorized boat use on the section of the Missouri River below Fort Benton to Robinson bridge, or anywhere near the section you mention.  Our Missouri River proposal is limited to restricting the size of motors  during the peak summer use period from Pelican Point (Above Cascade) to Holter Dam. As you may be aware, this section of the Missouri during the summer has very little motorized use currently and is heavily used primarily by wading and float boat fishermen as well a locals and their families in innertubes and small inflatables, rafts and canoes as well as driftboats. Our intention is to assure a safe experience for all, and maintain the current spectrum of boating opportunities Montana enjoys.  There are a lot of new motorized watercraft technology recently on the market which can go at high speed onto almost any stream, regardless of size, which threaten to change the current balance. Please feel free to contact us if you have further questions."

I wouldn't say this is completely a non-scientific initiative. The tributaries included in the proposal are critical spawning habitat for fish. Spawning beds in a foot of water and air boats or jets don't mix well.

I don't agree with the HP restrictions on the major rivers, but I am all for restricting use on the tributaries. They are some of the few places left where you can put in a little effort to hike and get away from the crowds.

[flatgo]

Sounds like this is from the guides on the Missouri who look down on anyone fishing not using a fly rod and a drift boat.  A lot of people hunt the Missouri in jet boats and fish it don't see a problem with jet boats.  maybe if the river is to congested we should limit the amount of trips a guide boats can make a day.

[njoy]

Mfish has the proper idea. In regards to the answer Big Sky received, sounds like maintaining current boating opportunities is what I witnessed at the bridge below Wolf Creek when a couple launching a jon boat with a small jet were told that the river was closed to motors and the warden was being called. They did not argue, just launched and headed upriver. I noticed that both men stating the river was closed had drift boats. This was in summer of 2015.

[wingnutty]

Scientific data and facts should make policy, not emotion.

The anti trapping initiative that just failed is a perfect example.
Anti trapping organizations attempting to scare their constituents by telling them the forests aren't safe and that kids are going to get killed by traps. Another favorite is that they can't go into public ground because there are traps everywhere.
All lies meant to scare people into voting the way they wanted them to vote.

100% agree.  Divided we will fall.  We need to support each other even if we don't trap, fish certain waters, run hounds, etc., etc., etc.  As soon as one pin falls others will follow.  The precedent has been set in more liberal states like Washington and California.  There is no stopping point.  Don't give an inch or before you know it you'll have ceded the entire field.  Stand united.

I consider myself a level headed and moderate guy, but on this stuff I really believe we just need to say: "NO".  No more.  No more restricting someone else's access for my benefit.  No more not caring because it doesn't immediately affect my preferred recreation.  Just "NO". 

[whiptail]

100% agree.  Divided we will fall.  We need to support each other even if we don't trap, fish certain waters, run hounds, etc., etc., etc.  As soon as one pin falls others will follow.  The precedent has been set in more liberal states like Washington and California.  There is no stopping point.  Don't give an inch or before you know it you'll have ceded the entire field.  Stand united.

I consider myself a level headed and moderate guy, but on this stuff I really believe we just need to say: "NO".  No more.  No more restricting someone else's access for my benefit.  No more not caring because it doesn't immediately affect my preferred recreation.  Just "NO". 

Hay folks here is a list of meetings and where to send your comments. We(Flathead Chapter Walleyes Unlimited and our local Bass club) had a meeting with Fwp. on Monday, Fwp. rejected the Quit Waters Initiative so Back country Hunters & Anglers went around them straight to the commissioners and the commissioners adopted it.
We need to get our comments in by Jan. 13. I am pushing for a 60 to 90 day extension.
Below is a list. to get heard.   

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Public comment sought on Quiet Waters Initiative

 

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks will hold public comment meetings around the state in January on proposed rules to limit motorized water craft use on some of the state’s water bodies.

The proposed rules address a petition, known as the Quiet Waters Initiative, submitted to the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission this past spring by Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

The petition states Montana has experienced advanced motorized technology on its waterways, which has potentially opened up waters previously thought to be unusable by motorized water craft.

At its regular May meeting, the Commission initiated rulemaking on the petition, stating, in part, the Commission should consider being proactive instead of reactive to the changes in recreation on Montana’s waterways to avoid conflicts and protect traditional and safe recreational uses.

 

For a complete list of waters considered in the petition, please go online to fwp.mt.gov. Click on the News tab and then click again on “Rules” under “Recent Public Notices.”

 

Public hearings on the Quiet Waters Petition will be held at the following times and locations:

 

•     Jan. 3 at the FWP Region 1 office, 490 N. Meridian Road, Kalispell at 6 p.m.

•     Jan. 4 at the FWP Region 2 office, 3201 Spurgin Road, Missoula at 6 p.m.

•     Jan. 5 at the FWP Region 3 office, 1400 S. 19th Ave., Bozemen at 6 p.m.

•     Jan. 9 at the FWP Region 5 office, 2300 Lake Elmo Drive, Billings at 6 p.m.

•     Jan. 11 at the FWP Region 4 office, 4600 Giant Springs Road, Great Falls at 6 p.m.

•     Jan. 11 at the FWP headquarters office, 1420 E. 6th Ave., Helena at 6 p.m.

 

The department will make reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities who wish to participate in this rulemaking process or need an alternative accessible format of this notice.  If you require an accommodation, contact the department no later than December 9, 2016, to advise us of the nature of the accommodation that you need.  Please contact Kaedy Gangstad, Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, P.O. Box 200701, Helena, Montana, 59620-0701; telephone (406) 444-4594; or e-mail [email protected].

 

Concerned persons may submit their data, views, or arguments either orally or in writing at the hearing.  Written data, views, or arguments may also be submitted to: Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Attn: Quiet Waters Petition, P.O. Box 200701, Helena, Montana, 59620-0701; or e-mail [email protected], and must be received no later than January 13, 2017.

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

resize

Marla Prell

Region 7 Information and Education Program Manager

352 I-94 Business Loop

Miles City, MT 59301

(406) 234-0926

[email protected]

[12BHNTN]

Managing for multiple-use and recreation doesn't mean that everyone gets to do whatever they want.  I enjoy hunting public lands, on foot, miles from my truck and certainly don't want ATV use being a free for all.  I also struggle with wake-boarding boats in my old 16' Crestliner and 28 hp Johnson.  I can't get around the huge wake they throw up without swamping my boat and they fully extinguish any sense of peace and fishing enjoyment until their wake (and loud "music") has passed.  I'd fully support every-other-day use restrictions on wake boats so that my ability to use the water isn't infringed upon.  The restrictions proposed in the Quiet Water petition are a starting point for discussion.  Reasonable restrictions allow everyone a piece of the pie.  Show up and be heard or stay home and accept the outcome.

[PerchAssault]

http://fwp.mt.gov/fwpDoc.html?id=78083

Just making it easy to get to the information.

Voice your opinion, that is all I got.  Now, we fish.

[BAMF22]

I have a flat bottom jet boat and if I want to put in at Craig and take it up the MO to Holter dam, why should I not be able to use my boat on our river??!!  because it upsets the fly fishermen?  That's crap!  They do not own the river!!

[whiptail]

Any new info out there in shanty land?

[whiptail]

25 Days left to get your comments in, Jan 13th is the deadline. Lets flood the commissioners with our comments
http://fwp.mt.gov/news/publicNotices/rules/pn_0218.html

[PerchPounderMT]

Its all about fly fisherman and the outfitters that cater to them,another economic booster for their wallets,nothing else.

[PerchPounderMT]

Here is the link for the proposal. Everyone should educate themselves on it before voicing their opinion. The first time I heard of it is when some locals were saying "BHA is trying to close access to the Missouri". I then went and read up on it and that is clearly not the case.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/backcountryhunters/pages/2831/attachments/original/1476226083/Quiet_Waters_Proposal_MT_BHA.pdf?1476226083

I have mixed feelings. The only affected rivers that I have fished are the Missouri and the Yellowstone, and this initiative wouldn't change anything for me on those rivers. I e-mailed BHA and they said the purpose of the initiative is to stay ahead of technology, similar to when they fought to prevent the use of drones for hunting. As far as I can tell, most of the affected waters aren't big enough for a traditional boat to practically navigate. Picture yourself wade fishing in one of these small streams and then having an air boat come blowing upstream towards you. Like I said though, I have only fished the Missouri and Yellowstone, so I would like to hear from others that have more experience on these other watersheds before I send in my comments.

So you dont care because it wont effect you personally?Imagine what will be next if they get their foot in the door...

[hoofer]

perch pounder mt is right it is about outfitters and drift boats .i loved the upper missouri river had a small jet boat that i used so many times on that section of river that i lost count. it got to be a real pain just to travel up the river with 15 drift boats per mile and one day (my last)17 between holter dam and wolfcreek bridge not to mention the hour it took to get my boat on to the trailer because of the line of outfitters putting in.sold the boat that year and i miss fishing the upper river dearly.they won i did nothing . i payed a big price.one voice is soft but many voices are loud and will be heard so speak up! i did not and i am ashamed.

[bigsky]

So you dont care because it wont effect you personally?Imagine what will be next if they get their foot in the door...

I do care, that's why I said I want to hear from others before I send in my comments.

[Quantoson]

Let's see both sides.
1. I am fishing from shore or on my small 12 foot aluminum boat, then comes 200 HP of bad a** boat 20 feet from me and 6 jet ski's behind them riding the wake.  Being a believer in individual rights to play as wished, I say nothing.  I hold on and ride the wakes
2. Others are fishing off shore with bait, fly rods etc. and have the mess of wakes to deal with.
3.  Let's just say I'm on the jet ski, young and full of who cares, I decide that riding wakes of 200HP boat in front of me will be a thrill.  I see other people on small boats, like my Grandad, fishing, but I don't care.  Exercising individual rights.
4.Comes along Trout Unlimited who has lots of money and pads political pockets.  These padded pockets talk to the MFWP on behalf of TU. 
5. Then comes the need to invade and establish rules for people like the shore fishermen and small boaters like me who unknowingly are being represented by a commie organization.
6. Yet no one is speaking of the rights of the 200HP boaters and the wake riders.  Sure, you want your piece and quite but the vigorous younger want their rights to be happy and ride for excitement.
7.  So who rights do we want to infringe on?  The vigorous or the passive bait and fly dunkers?
8>>>A.My own opinion is that we leave it alone.
  >>>>B. Or let the fishing license buyers decide by vote and not by clout or money.  Every Montana resident with a valid fishing license should be able to cast a ballot for or against any infringements of rights to use a stream, river or tributary as they chose.  For or against and no changes to usage, type of motor etc. Stays as is to vote as for.  Against, -Change to lower the HP of boat and the limits as written on the proposed changes.  This, in my opinion, is what is fair and conventionally a republic and democratic way of approaching the issue.