The impacted portion of the river would run from the railroad trestle near City Beach downstream to the Highway 40 bridge. The city will have to petition the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission to obtain the new designation.

Currently there is a no-wake restriction on the stretch of river that runs through town.

In September, council postponed a vote that could have led to a total ban of motorized boats on the river. Some councilors suggested that small electric motors or low horsepower gas motors should continue to be allowed.

Richard Hildner — lead advocate for the nonmotorized designation — said motorized boats are not compatible with current river use. He cited safety issues and the opportunity to protect the river from potential erosion caused by whitewater-wake.

At a public hearing in September, a few residents told council that closing the river to motorized boats would eliminate usage for some folks, like those with disabilities.

Michael Park told council he has limited use of his arms, but with the assistance of a small motor, he is able to navigate the river.

“My little putt, putt motor is not causing any problems,” he said.

In 2007, the council voted unanimously to prohibit the use of internal combustion motors on the river within the city limits. However, a month later the action was rescinded after property owners along the river objected.

Council will consider the resolution Nov. 4 at 7 p.m. during their regular meeting at City Hall.

Whitefish City Council will consider a resolution Monday that could lead to a six-mile stretch of the Whitefish River being limited to manually-powered watercraft or those with small electric motors.

The impacted portion of the river would run from the railroad trestle near City Beach downstream to the Highway 40 bridge. The city will have to petition the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission to obtain the new designation.

Currently there is a no-wake restriction on the stretch of river that runs through town.

In September, council postponed a vote that could have led to a total ban of motorized boats on the river. Some councilors suggested that small electric motors or low horsepower gas motors should continue to be allowed.

Richard Hildner — lead advocate for the nonmotorized designation — said motorized boats are not compatible with current river use. He cited safety issues and the opportunity to protect the river from potential erosion caused by whitewater-wake.

At a public hearing in September, a few residents told council that closing the river to motorized boats would eliminate usage for some folks, like those with disabilities.

Michael Park told council he has limited use of his arms, but with the assistance of a small motor, he is able to navigate the river.

“My little putt, putt motor is not causing any problems,” he said.

In 2007, the council voted unanimously to prohibit the use of internal combustion motors on the river within the city limits. However, a month later the action was rescinded after property owners along the river objected.

Council will consider the resolution Nov. 4 at 7 p.m. during their regular meeting at City Hall.