It鈥檚 been decades since anglers have been able to fish one of the region鈥檚 most popular rivers, the Gallatin, from a boat. That鈥檚 due to a 45-year-old regulation designed to prevent user-group conflicts and preserve the wade-fishing experience that recreationists from Gallatin Valley and beyond enjoy.
Now, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks is looking to implement a similar prohibition on fishing from vessels in the main stem鈥檚 low-flow cousin, the East Gallatin. The proposal is included in the , which are currently open for public comment.
Some members of Montana鈥檚 angling community welcome the shift, describing it as a proactive effort to preserve spawning habitat along an important fishery. Others are wary of restricted access to one of the region鈥檚 sleepier rivers. They argue that the state should do more to address other East Gallatin threats, such as nutrient pollution and degraded habitat.
FWP Region 3 Fish Manager Mike Duncan told Montana Free Press that the agency is pursuing the change because shrinking streamflows and warming temperatures point to challenging conditions ahead for the area鈥檚 fish. He鈥檚 concerned that more anglers will find their way to the mellow, cottonwood-lined river northwest of Bozeman in search of uncrowded waters.
鈥淎nglers, and recreationalists in general, are getting more creative with how they access and fish smaller streams,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e wanted to bring it up, have the discussion with the public 鈥� especially with the increased use and frustrations we hear (about) on some of the larger rivers, like the Lower Madison and the Yellowstone.鈥�
Duncan added that while the Gallatin has generally maintained a robust trout population, area biologists are starting to see indications that numbers are starting to slip. The East Gallatin provides spawning habitat for fish that make the journey up from larger, mainstem rivers to the north and west, Duncan said. He argues that the change is consistent with the agency鈥檚 larger effort to minimize pressure on tributaries that have an outsized effect on mainstem rivers. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not seeing as many bigger, adult fish like we used to,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e want to try to get ahead of any changes to use that could potentially further impact the river.鈥�
The area鈥檚 hydrology and topography also played a role in the decision, Duncan said. He anticipates that the change will preserve the most popular form of angling on the East Gallatin, wade fishing, while minimizing harm to spawning habitat used by fish in the larger watershed.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not just an important spawning and rearing habitat for the East Gallatin, or even the Lower Gallatin, but these areas support fisheries across a much greater area,鈥� he said, pointing to the Jefferson and Madison rivers as examples.
鈥淲e don鈥檛 have a lot of boat traffic yet. We just wanted to have the chat to see if this is something that would be worth getting ahead of,鈥� he added. 鈥淚f boat traffic were to increase 鈥� especially in years like this, where the East Gallatin had exceptionally low flows all winter 鈥� folks would be forced to drag boats across gravel bars, where we know there are a lot of brown trout spawning, and whitefish as well.鈥�
The egg-trampling concern isn鈥檛 as pronounced for wade fishing because anglers on foot are able to make their way alongside the river on exposed gravel bars.
Alex Leone, executive director of Public Land Water Association, counters that the agency should provide more data to support the change, especially since boat traffic is modest and the window to float the East Gallatin is so short.
鈥淭here are a lot of questions that need to be answered,鈥� he said. 鈥淚f this is a spawning and a resource concern, where鈥檚 the science?鈥�
Leone also argues that limiting nutrient pollution would be a more effective way to bolster the river鈥檚 slumping brown trout population.
鈥淭he biggest problem is not the floaters 鈥� it鈥檚 the water quality issues,鈥� Leone said. 鈥淲hy don鈥檛 you limit Bozeman鈥檚 allowance of nonpoint source pollution (and) address the causal factor?鈥�
Guy Alsentzer, executive director of Upper Missouri Waterkeeper, argued that the state should reduce sedimentation and nutrient pollution before limiting access.
鈥淚 find it very myopic to talk about restricting the public from boat fishing on the entirety of the East Gallatin while we have (another) branch of government that has recognized serious pollution problems in primary pollutants that directly affect wild trout recruitment,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t seems a little ridiculous to me.鈥�
Alsentzer has long to create a cold-water fisheries task force so government agencies dealing with water quantity, water quality and fish management can collaborate to shore up Montana鈥檚 struggling fisheries. He鈥檚 also called on agencies like the Montana Department of Environmental Quality on a variety of southwestern Montana rivers. Nitrogen pollution from wastewater, poorly maintained septic systems and fertilizer runoff generate algal blooms that deprive aquatic ecosystems of the oxygen they need to thrive.
Other members of Montana鈥檚 angling community are eager for FWP to better explain its reasoning. Clayton Elliott, Trout Unlimited鈥檚 conservation and government affairs director, said he鈥檚 generally supportive of targeted spawning closures that are grounded in science. And it鈥檚 not lost on him, he said, that the mainstem of the Gallatin and the Upper Madison are closed to fishing from boats to prioritize wade fishing and minimize conflicts.
鈥淚鈥檓 familiar with the regulatory tool. I鈥檓 familiar with the resource concern. I鈥檝e not necessarily seen the two paired together 鈥� as this being the tool to ameliorate the resource concern,鈥� he said. 鈥淚鈥檇 like to talk to the department to understand their rationale.鈥�
Elliott added that he anticipates there will be a 鈥減retty robust conversation about that proposal specifically鈥� at the meeting FWP is hosting in Bozeman on May 19. At that meeting, the department will take public temperature on the regulation changes.
鈥淚 certainly have heard the conspiracies of other folks, saying this may be related to where the governor lives,鈥� he said. 鈥淭here are lots of thoughts and feelings about what this closure might be trying to accomplish.鈥�
Gov. Greg Gianforte owns property on the East Gallatin River. In 2009, Gianforte over the location of an easement anglers used to access the East Gallatin near Cherry Creek. The surfaced in Gianforte鈥檚 2016 run for governor against Democrat Steve Bullock, with access groups using the conflict to describe Gianforte as anti-public access, a characterization Gianforte has resisted.
Bozeman resident Pat Straub says it鈥檚 suspicious that such a significant change was rolled into the regulations the way it was. (It鈥檚 nested under an 鈥淓ast Gallatin River Pike Harvest鈥� proposal.)
鈥淎s an angler and outfitter who鈥檚 been around for decades in Montana, I find it very interesting that they chose to do this for a biological reason that was buried, or hidden, in redacting a northern pike regulation,鈥� Straub said. 鈥淭he East Gallatin is a very unique fishery. Access is really difficult. There are very few places where someone can legally access the East Gallatin. If you limit the ability for people to float and fish the East Gallatin, you鈥檙e essentially cutting off access to the river.鈥�
For his part, Duncan said none of the proposals incorporated in the regulations came from landowners. He emphasized that this is the earliest iteration of the regulations. With an extra step added to the process, members of the recreating public will have multiple opportunities to weigh in before the Fish and Wildlife Commission adopts the final package later this year. Duncan said he has an 鈥渙pen door鈥� to hear public concerns.
The spans 89 pages. The on the document is open through May 31.
___
This story was originally published by and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
