Montana's stream access laws have long been attacked by those who would rather the public didn't have access to all those fishable rivers and streams, and right now, it looks like the bad guys are winning.

HB 309 (the "Ditch Bill") redefines the concept of irrigation ditch to include a lot of waters in Montana, and the bill has passed the House and is on its way to the Montana Senate.

Wayne at the WillFishForWork blog offers this insight:

So I was not surprised to see Montana HB 309 pass the 3rd reading today by a party line vote of 57-43. Now it goes on to the Senate where again the Republican majority will no doubt rubber stamp the thing and send it to the governor.

Fortunately, Montana's current governor is a Democrat and has already expressed his opinion on the amount of garbage bills the current legislature is cranking out and historically has had no qualms about butting heads with them. The good news is that while House Republicans have the two-thirds vote to override a veto, the Senate Republicans would fall short, if votes adhere to party lines.

In this story, a Montana Senator thinks he has the votes to kill the bill, which he calls "the biggest assault on Montana's Stream Access Law in years."

If this passes the senate, I think it would be time for the Undergrounders to go all medieval on the thing by flooding the governor with emails.

I'll try to update this post as things progress, but not surprisingly, several Montana fly fishing blogs are doing most of the heavy lifting around this mess, including, the Troutbugs blog, WillFishForWork, In the Back Eddy and ChiWulff.

ChiWulff points us toward a hilarious-if-it-weren't-so-true editorial by Montana TU's Bruce Farling, which includes gems like:

During the campaign season, majority party lawmakers in the Montana Legislature promised voters they would focus in January on balancing the state's budget, reducing unnecessary government and creating jobs. Who could argue with these general goals?

Apparently they were kidding.

Instead of addressing the economy, many Republican legislators are spending - many would say wasting - inordinate time reviving culture-war issues, addressing pet grudges, attacking what they perceive as government interference in business and our personal lives, and crafting divisive bills that, well, increase government interference in business and our personal lives, such as prohibiting companies from banning guns in employee vehicles, or forcing medical procedures on women.

...

HB 309 undermines our balanced stream access law by classifying as "ditches" natural streams that have been modified by irrigators, such as channels that have been manipulated by irrigation control structures. Also qualifying as "ditches" would be natural stream reaches that include flows augmented by irrigation water that was diverted from the channel, but returned to the stream farther down stream.

HB 309 will turn kids who swim in the side-channels of Rattlesnake Creek in Missoula or Fleshman Creek in Livingston into trespassers - no matter that families have recreated in these natural stream channels for generations. Public use in these waters and many others will be outlawed simply because years ago irrigators were allowed to control flows in these channels using diversion structures.

If this bill passes, it will be illegal for you to fish, swim or float without permission in many popular waters simply because they've been modified by an irrigation structure or include return flows. This list includes main-stems or side-channels of the Beaverhead, Milk, Big Hole, Yellowstone, Jefferson, Bitterroot, Gallatin, upper Clark Fork, and most if not all streams and natural sloughs in irrigated areas. If the bill passes, families, anglers, floaters and guides will be kicked off hundreds of miles of streams we have been using since Montana became a territory. Angling, much of it on streams, generates $300 million to Montana's economy. Our nationally acclaimed stream and river fishing has long been a carrot for business people locating in Montana. How does it help the state's economy when you kick anglers off our streams?

As In The Back Eddy noted, this bill has its roots in the Mitchell Slough court decision, where landowners (including former rock star Huey Lewis) lost in their battle to keep the public out of a river side-channel.

Frankly, those with even middling memories will note the similarities between this bill and the recently successful attempt to severely limit stream access in Utah.

Both come as a result of a court action that denied landowners (typically wealthy landowners) the ability to privatize a public resource, and both represent sneaky and apparently (to begin with) under-the-radar attempts to resolve what the courts have already decided - and in the public's favor.

If this goes to Montana's governor, you'll have homework Undergrounders; emails and letters to write.

See you with pen in hand, Tom Chandler