River petition rescinded

By RICHARD HANNERS — Whitefish Pilot

The Whitefish City Council on Monday took a second look at the idea of banning internal-combustion engines on boats traveling on Whitefish River between Whitefish Lake and the city limits.

On Sept. 17, the council unanimously directed city staff to draft a petition to the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission requesting a ban. But since then, the city received two letters asking the city to reconsider its petition.

"I don't want to shut down motorboats on the river," councilor Velvet Phillips-Sullivan said, adding that putt-putting on the river was part of Whitefish culture.

She also noted that the city's Downtown Master Plan supported the use of motorboats in the Whitefish Landing slough that might be dug out of BNSF Railway land.

Councilor John Muhlfeld said he agreed. Noting his strong position on water quality and that he wasn't present when the council met last time, Muhlfeld said the city should look at alternatives to a ban, such as enforcing the no-wake zone or limiting horsepower.

Councilor Shirley Jacobson also agreed with Phillips-Sullivan.

"I think we were a little hasty," she said.

Councilor Nancy Woodruff, however, said she didn't want to "totally drop this issue." Noting that the council was under a "time crunch" to get the petition out by Sept. 30, she said was still concerned about impacts by motorboats.

Councilor Nick Palmer agreed with Woodruff, but her friendly amendment to petition FWP again next year died for lack of a second.

"I like what I'm hearing," Gary Whitman told the council as he listened to their discussion.

Whitman, who's owned property at the mouth of the Whitefish River for the past 30 years and accesses the lake with a motorboat he keeps docked at his home, wrote to the council requesting they rescind the petition.

"I am concerned that the lack of motorized access from my property to the lake will have a substantial negative impact on its value," he said. "Unfortunately, I was not notified in advance of the council's consideration of the matter."

Whitman said he talked with city attorney John Phelps and learned the city had not issued a public notice in advance of the Sept. 17 council meeting.

The recommendation to petition FWP to create a non-motorized section on the river was listed on the council agenda.

Whitman also said prohibiting motorized watercraft to protect the no-wake zone was not necessary.

"By this logic, the city would prohibit vehicles from traveling its streets because some people violated speed limits," he said.

As for the concern that propellers might stir up contaminated river-bottom sediments, then "the restrictions should apply only where the sediments are contaminated," Whitman said.

Robert Shumer, who also lives on Birch Point Drive and wrote to the council, expressed his strong opposition to the petition.

"Is it customary for the city council to take this type of action without input from the affected citizens?" he asked.

Shumer wanted to know if the city and state would be liable if property values dropped as a result of the ban.

"I realize that you represent our city, but I am trying to understand my rights as a citizen with a dock and motorboat on the river," he said.

Nelson Roosendahl came to the Pilot's office last week saying he didn't know about the idea until he read about it in the newspaper.

He said he uses his motorboat to commute to downtown Whitefish from his home on the lake, mooring his boat along the river and walking downtown.

Roosendahl questioned whether gas-powered boats were harming water quality on the river. Instead, the river was being impacted by gas-powered boats on Whitefish Lake, gasoline leaks at a gas station and chemicals used by the city to melt ice on roads, he said.

He also suggested a prejudice exists against motorboats and in favor of kayaks.

"Elections are looming," he said. "I guess the council is desperate to show some progress in an agenda heavy on environmental protection."