The Skinny on Streamside Setbacks in Western Montana

By Brianna Randall, 2-25-08

Would you set up a tent on an empty highway? 

Paul Hansen, a former University of Montana professor, asked this question at a February streamside setbacks workshop in Kalispell.  Though the answer may be a simple one for many folks, a similar question has generated extensive public comment across several western Montana counties: would you build a house in the flood plain?

Hansen reminded Flathead County residents that just because you might not see cars coming when your tent goes up doesn’t mean you won’t get run over when the traffic starts.  And the same holds true for building a house right on the banks of a beautiful creek or river: though that land is dry at the time, streams tend to roam over time, which might include a wet side-trip right into your living room.

Meanwhile, at a February 6th streamside setback meeting further south in the Clark Fork basin, Skalkaho Creek landowner Doug Soehren told Ravalli County Commissioners a real-life example of getting “run over” by a stream.  After two decades of living right on the banks of Skalkaho, the creek caused costly structural damage to Soehren’s home.  Now, he and his wife must rebuild it.  That’s why Doug asked the Ravalli County Commissioners to prevent similar economic losses for future Bitterroot residents by enacting streamside setback regulations.

Both Ravalli and Flathead Counties are currently considering adopting setbacks in different formats to buffer streams and rivers from too-close development.  Hansen explains that setbacks are a low-cost approach to protecting private property from flood damage and maintaining valuable riparian areas.

Don Mabry, who’s also lived on Skalkaho Creek for decades, would second Hansen’s opinion.  Over the past twenty years, he’s watched many of his neighbors manage their land well—but a few have manipulated the streambanks to the detriment of the creek and downstream landowners.

“I only caught three trout last time I fished all day—and I’m by no means a novice fisherman,” says Mabry.

Don doesn’t just lament the three fishing holes that disappeared due to the stream’s increased velocity from rip-rap walls, or the lack of fish-friendly habitat as his neighbors replaced native willows and shrubs with pesticide-fed Kentucky Bluegrass lawns.  Mabry’s biggest concern is the dollar signs he sees floating downstream, lost forever to the Bitterroot’s economy.

Hundreds of tons of sediment wash down Skalkaho and other creeks as a result of streamside landowners’ “keep-it-at-bay” bank stabilization measures.  Don believes that too-close development has cost the community “millions of dollars” in lost recreation opportunities, as sediments smother fish eggs and buildings block valuable scenic views.  The Bitter Root Water Forum, a local watershed group, agrees with Don, and urged the Ravalli Commissioners to adopt setbacks to protect Bitterrooters’ water quality and celebrated streams.

Many opponents of streamside setbacks believe these regulations might decrease property values by constraining the use of the property.  The Clark Fork Coalition, a non-profit organization based in Missoula, researched this concern to better understand any economic implications from streamside protections.  The Coalition reviewed available literature on waterfront setback zoning, and has found no evidence that setbacks negatively affect property value.

In fact, an economic study conducted in 2000 by the University of Wisconsin showed that a minimum waterway zoning of 200 feet actually resulted in an economic gain to homeowners, raising an average home price from 7 to 12 percent.

Another economic study, conducted by Cleveland State University from 1999 to 2005, analyzed the sale of over 4,000 single-family homes and condos in six communities of the Chagrin River Watershed in Ohio, 400 of which fell under riparian setback regulations.  The study revealed no statistical evidence that riparian setbacks affect home prices at all. 

Citizens for a Better Flathead, another non-profit organization, also researched setbacks’ impact on property values, and produced a summary document available on their website.

Communities in the Clark Fork watershed can reduce flood damage and increase property values by creating buffers for our streams. Yet even with plenty of strong evidence in favor of protecting our riverbanks, the term “streamside setback” still generates big turnouts at public meetings, as Montanans are often especially interested in anything involving both our private property and our treasured backyard creeks.

This public interest was evident at the February 6th Ravalli County Commission meeting on streamside setbacks in Hamilton.  Hundreds of Bitterroot residents crammed into the county meeting room to learn more about the eighth draft of the Stream Setback Interim Zoning Regulations. Here’s a deeper look at what caused such an impressive turnout on a wintery Wednesday afternoon.

Ravalli County’s volunteer Streamside Setback Committee’s proposed nine-page ordinance is pretty similar to Missoula County’s still-in-progress regulations, and—minus the specific river and stream names—remarkably close to what’s already in place in places like Gallatin County and along all four counties bordering the Big Hole River.

Here’s a sampling of the activities that would be permitted in the proposed setback zone, which ranges from 200 feet on the mainstem Bitterroot River to 50 feet on small streams:

• All existing structures, and any associated maintenance or repair work.
• Expansion and replacement of existing structures: new construction may be no more than 50% larger than the original structure, up to a maximum of 1000 square feet.
• Weed control
• All irrigation activities, including maintaining and cleaning ditches and diversion structures
• Constructing new roads (unpaved) and stream crossings needed to access property.
• Commercial timber harvest, if approved by appropriate public agencies
• Recreational activities, like fishing, hunting, hiking, and picnicking
• Any streamside maintenance or construction conducted under a valid 124 or 310 permit issued by the Bitterroot Conservation District.

What’s restricted under Ravalli County’s proposed regulations?  Only these three things:

1. Construction of new, permanent structures, including residential and commercial buildings, outbuildings, roads or parking lots, and utilities.

2. New septic tanks, drain fields, septic lines, or other wastewater treatment systems.

3. Removing streamside vegetation except for specified activities, like fire protection, weed control, agricultural use, or to protect public safety or private property.

To learn more about the public process for streamside protections in Ravalli County, or to read the draft regulations yourself, visit http://co.ravalli.mt.us/planning. 

For information on the updated Flathead County subdivision regulations—which have proposed riparian buffers and streamside setbacks—visit http://www.co.flathead.mt.us/fcpz/drafts.html.

Stay tuned for upcoming Missoula County public workshops on countywide streamside protections, too.  To read the spring 2007 draft setback proposal, or learn more about Missoula’s efforts, visit the Rural Initiatives website.

The author is the Water Policy Director for the Clark Fork Coalition, a non-profit organization that works to create healthy, vibrant rivers and communities in the Clark Fork River basin.