Flathead Lake & River Fisheries Management Plan Mirror Page

Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) began the process to develop this draft fisheries co-management-planning document in June of 1999. Governor Marc Racicot and the late Tribal Chairman Mickey Pablo issued an open letter to people interested in Flathead fisheries, urging the public to "work together to develop and implement" a new co-management plan for Flathead Lake and the river system upstream of the lake. They also called on the Montana Consensus Council to assess the social and biological situation and to suggest a public involvement process.

The Consensus Council interviewed 100 "stakeholders," or persons interested in the fisheries during the summer, 1999. They produced an assessment that highlighted the changing nature of the aquatic system in Flathead Lake, and recommended an advisory group approach to sort out the complex biological and social issues regarding fisheries management in the system.

FWP and CSKT developed joint goals and guidelines for managing fisheries in the system, then solicited 12 citizen advisors, peer selected from the public, to develop management options within those guidelines. The Flathead Lake and River Fisheries Co-management Advisory Committee met six times between February and June, 2000, and developed four draft options or approaches for managing the lake and river system. FWP and CSKT Resource Staff worked together with the advisors to include these options in this draft management planning document.

This draft planning document, including the four management options, is offered for public review, additional scoping, and comment through August 4, 2000. CSKT and FWP will analyze public comments and prepare a final draft management plan, with requisite details for management strategies and monitoring, in cooperation with the Flathead Reservation Fish and Wildlife Board. This Board includes both state and tribal interests, appointed by the Governor and Tribal Council. The draft management plan will be released for a final round of public comment in September before the Board recommends a final plan to the CSKT Tribal Council and the FWP Director/Commission for consideration and adoption.

This co-management planning document addresses the interconnected fisheries of Flathead Lake, the Flathead River and its tributaries upstream to its forks, the Swan River downstream from Bigfork Dam, the South Fork downstream from Hungry Horse Dam, the Middle Fork, and the North Fork upstream to the Canadian Border. The planning document does not cover fisheries in the Flathead River downstream from Kerr Dam. The final management plan will set co-management direction for the period 2001-2010.

Fish and aquatic communities have changed dramatically over the last decade. Since the last co-management plan was written in 1989, kokanee salmon have disappeared from the lake despite a 5-year effort to recover them. Lake trout have increased in numbers and now make up most of the recreational fishery. Lake whitefish are very numerous. Mysis shrimp, first noted in Flathead Lake in 1981, strip zooplankton from the upper waters of the lake and serve as food for deep water fish such as lake trout and lake whitefish. Native species such as bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout have declined. With the establishment of Mysis and growth of the lake trout population, angling limits on lake trout were increased. These angling-limit changes illustrate the strategy followed by FWP and CSKT managers to address increasing numbers of lake trout and decreasing numbers of native fish.

The lake's food web is unstable, calling for a new, flexible management plan based on adaptive management. Adaptive management emphasizes the application of new knowledge and "learning by doing." It allows for immediate changes in management direction as research results come in and knowledge increases.

Recognizing the changing nature of the fishery, CSKT and FWP developed goals and guidelines for the co-management-planning document that emphasize flexibility and research. The guidelines were built around the vision of CSKT, which is to restore the native fish community, and the vision of FWP, which is to protect and enhance native fish, while maintaining a viable recreational fishery. The guidelines included provisions to increase native species, address nonnative species which have negative effects on native species, minimize losses to recreational and subsistence fishing, acquire information through research on Mysis and other parts of the aquatic food web to guide management, protect habitat, adaptive management, and implement a strong monitoring program to measure success. Working within those guidelines, the Advisory Committee developed four draft options for managing the Flathead Lake and River system.

The Advisory Committee was able to reach agreement on seven sets of actions or strategies to manage the lake and river fisheries. They reached agreement on strategies for Flathead River fish population management, with a strong emphasis on native species. They agreed on strategies for increased boating access; water quality and fisheries habitat; education and enforcement; monitoring and further research; and adaptive management features. These strategies include 42 separate actions designed to help the fisheries and are included in detail in the body of the draft management plan.

The Advisory Committee developed four different options or approaches that address the complexity of fish population management in Flathead Lake. Each option includes the strategies mentioned above, but differs in approach to managing fish populations in the lake. The options offer a good range of possible approaches for managing the lake's fish populations. Options 1 and 2 propose to reduce lake trout slowly, using recreational fishing as the main tool. Options 3 and 4 reduce lake trout more rapidly, and each includes some sort of commercial lake trout fishing.

Option 1: The goal/objective of this option is to manage the lake for bull trout, cutthroat trout, and lake trout, emphasizing harvest of smaller lake trout while maintaining a large (trophy) lake trout component. It proposes to maintain the current recreational fishery, but suggests regulations to reduce the consumption of larger lake trout containing higher levels of the contaminants PCB and mercury. The option assumes the following: native fish are limited by competition with Mysis and nonnative fish; the current liberal limits on lake trout and other non-natives are reducing their numbers; increased protection of larger lake trout to address the contaminant issue will be offset by increased harvest of smaller lake trout, leading to a net benefit to native fish; lake trout control Mysis abundance and large reductions in lake trout will upset the food web and may affect water quality. This option proposes a modest reduction in the number of small lake trout, and proposes to replace the slot limit on lake trout with a regulation requiring anglers to release all lake trout longer than 28 inches. It calls for continued suppression of lake trout by recreational anglers, but if Mysis increase, it allows adjustment in harvest of lake trout. It specifies that lake trout will be controlled through recreational angling, and seeks to maintain the current fishing opportunities and bag limits to preserve the economic base and angling traditions on Flathead Lake.

Option 2: The goal/objective of this option is to protect and restore native fish by continuing the current management direction. It builds on successful management efforts of habitat protection and increased harvest of small lake trout. This option predicts an increasing trend of bull trout and cutthroat trout, and maintains the current regulations and recreational fishery. This option emphasizes research and adds elements of adaptive management. The option assumes the following: Bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout populations are limited by Mysis, lake trout, and other nonnative fish; current liberal limits on lake trout and other nonnative fish in the lake and river system are reducing nonnative fish and are leading to increased native fish populations. The option proposes a modest reduction in small lake trout but the reduction would be greater than in Option 1. It maintains current fishing regulations, including the slot limit on lake trout, except that lake whitefish limits are increased in the lake and river (this strategy for lake whitefish is included in all four options). The option calls for adaptive management strategies to correct the management course if native species do not increase, or if there are unacceptable losses in the recreational fishery.

Option 3: The goal/objective of this option is to protect and restore native fish species by reducing lake trout and other nonnative fish to reduce predation, competition, and hybridization to acceptable levels. It seeks to diversify the fishery from the current one dominated by lake trout. The option assumes the following: Bull trout and cutthroat trout are limited by Mysis and nonnative fish; current liberal limits on lake trout and other nonnative fish are not stabilizing or reducing these populations, so are not leading to increased native fish populations; reductions in lake trout will not lead to reductions in the recreational fishery, due to increases in other fish populations. The option proposes to set numerical targets for each important fish species in the lake, and calls for immediate, more rapid and aggressive reduction of lake trout. It calls for significantly increasing harvest of lake trout, and elimination of the slot limit for lake trout. It proposes to reduce nonnative fish to maintain a minimum level of bull trout redds in the North and Middle Fork spawning tributaries (the Advisory Committee proposed a level of 350 bull trout redds), calling for commercial hook and line angling for lake trout if necessary to reach the objective. It also calls for an experimental release of white sturgeon into the lake.

Option 4: The goal/objective of this option is to increase bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout to harvestable levels by aggressively harvesting lake trout and lake whitefish by commercial and recreational angling. A goal is a target level of bull trout redds in index spawning areas (the Advisory Committee proposed a level of 300 redds). The option assumes the following: Bull trout and cutthroat trout are limited by Mysis and nonnative fish; current liberal limits on lake trout and other nonnative fish are not stabilizing or reducing these populations, so are not leading to increased native fish populations; reductions in lake trout will not lead to reductions in the recreational fishery, due to increases in other fish populations; commercial fishing would not result in excessive by-catch of native fish. The option proposes an immediate and more aggressive reduction in lake trout. It proposes to continue the recreational fishery and the slot limit on lake trout and establish a single line commercial fishery for lake trout until the level of 300 spawning redds is met and maintained. If bull trout levels drop below a minimum threshold (the Advisory Committee proposed 100 redds) it would institute more aggressive steps such as some sort of netting of lake trout. The option proposes to increase harvest of lake whitefish through commercial netting methods.

When finalized, this co-management document will direct fisheries resource co-management activities for the next 10 years in the Flathead Lake and River system. Because of the far-reaching importance of Flathead fisheries, FWP and CSKT consider it vital that the public provides comment on this stage of the draft planning document which includes the four management options. Broad public comment will allow preparation of an effective management plan. Please complete a copy of the attached public comment form and mail it to FWP/CSKT, postmarked by August 4, 2000, or drop it off at the CSKT or FWP offices by August 4.

The proposed schedule for completing a final management plan is summarized below:

Draft Plan

Because the complete Draft Flathead Lake and River Co-Management Planning Document is a large 47-page document, it is provided as a PDF file so that you can more easily view or print it on your computer. This file is 580K. Click here to download the Planning Document to your computer.

Note: You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader software for your computer in order to view and/or print the document. This software is available for free at http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html. Please follow Adobe's instructions to install and use the Acrobat Reader software. If you have problems with Acrobat Reader you must contact Adobe Systems Inc., Montana FWP cannot offer service or support for this software.

Comment Form

The comment form for the Draft Flathead Lake and River Co-Management Planning Document is provided as a small PDF file. Click here to download the Comment Form to your computer.