Glacier Natl. Park or Bitterroot Natl. Forest

[itchmesir]

If anyone has any personal info on either of these places.. it would be great if you could share it with me...

See, i am planning a summer camping trip for me and my gf... i have sorta come to one of these two destinations.. some of my criteria for prime camping would be hike-ability.. not looking for anything too extreme.. im a casual hiker.. good.. if not great.. fly fishing.. shore fishing and wading preferred.. as i do not own a boat.. nor can i swim.. so rapids are out of the question.. accessibility to campgrounds... i don't quite get the gist of Glacier.. there are only 2 reserved camp grounds.. rest are first come first serve.. so is it possible i will get there and not be able to camp? not looking for anything i really want to pack too deep into.. ii dont own backpacking gear... so i wont have the lightest of loads..

any input will be appreciated.. thank you

[duck patrol]

I work just south of Glacier in Augusta MT for the Lewis & Clark National forest and frequent the park often. it is a beautiful place but it is a heavily visited park even during the week in the peak summer months, however you still should be able to see plenty of wildlife- bears sheep goats etc. if it were me i would look into some of the other national forests if you want to be by yourselves more. you will find great recreational opportunities in all the national forests with not nearly as many people.

[itchmesir]

I'd like to find something thats not people heavy.. but also still in the mountains and close to some fly fishing

[traveler]

We spent some time in that area over the last couple years....Glacier is very cool, but also very crowded. I'd drive around it (the eastern side has awesome scenery) and spend my time in the area between the western park boundary and the Idaho border. Very cool area, the mountains aren't sper high for hiking, some cool rivers (look for the Yak on your map) and way less people. We didn't spend as much time in the woods as I'd have liked, but I loved the area and though it had great promise for future trips. I would think there are enough small, forest campgrounds, but you (or I ) would likely end up doing some roadside primitive camps as well, I don't think that would be a problem there. Good luck:)

[duck patrol]

if your up in the area i would also recommend doing a rafting trip on the northfork of the flathead and zip lining in whitefish both are pretty fun and pretty cheap like 60-70 dollars i think. what time of year are you planning on going?

[Powerstroke]

I visited Glacier last summer for a family trip. We brought our camper so we stayed in a campground outside the park. Glacier is very busy on the main roads, but we found several hiking trails that were not very busy at all. Any of the rangers can point you in the direction of some less used trails. I'm not a big fly fisher so I can't speak to that.

Lots and lots of places to go out there.

[JBMasterAngler]

This is a great thread so far...I have glacier on my bucket list of places to visit, and now I have some new perspective to look into as far as making this trip. Doing some fishing would be great, but would I get lot's of dirty looks if I used spinning gear?

[itchmesir]

thanks for the replies.. i'll definitely be using this info to my advantage

[Powerstroke]

Who cares if you get dirty looks? You dance with what you brought.

I forgot to mention that we saw mulies, black bear, grizzlies, bighorn sheep and mountain goats while we were in Glacier. We chose to stay on the west side. I would say it is less crowded, but that's relative. We went in late June and the Sun Road opened all the way through on the last day we were there. It was awesome to go hiking on top of 20ft of snow in June at 9000ft. Very few people on that route.

[so haaad]

Does anyone have any info on the second option of itchmesir's questions, the Bitterroots? I'd be interested in any info for this area too.

[skolfoppa]

The Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness is a fantastic place to visit. While Glacier NP is a spectacular experience, the Bitterroots are more rugged. The Wilderness complex extends southeast from Missoula along the Idaho border. It is a very cool area. To really appreciate this Wilderness area you need to throw on a pack and disappear for a few days. The further you go, the better it gets. Day hikes are good too. Most of the trailheads have a couple campsites. Hope this info helps. Let me know if you need more as I never get tired of talking about Montana. Skol.

[JBMasterAngler]

Just read on yahoo that glacier lost 2 glaciers, and the rest may be gone within the next 10 years. Yikes I better get planning on a trip out there!

[troutned]

I lived adjacent to the Bitterroot Nat'l Forest from 2005-2008 (the property I lived on bordered it). As National Forests go, the Bitterroot is one of the busier ones. The west side (west of HWY. 93) is pretty limited access from Missoula to Darby. By that I mean not a lot of roads that get you "back there". It can be awesome hiking, but you're generally looking at low trailheads and a long hike if you want to get to any lakes. South of Darby, the West Fork of the Bitterroot has better access, particularly around Painted Rocks Reservoir. The east side of the valley has a little bit better access, and the area around Skalkaho Creek (look just SE of Hamilton) has some cool areas, decent access, and good day-hikes. As for the fly-fishing, I know that the Bitterroot River gets POUNDED and the fish are well-educated. I almost never fished that river because it was too darn frustrating for me. But I am NOT a great fly-fisher. However, some of the larger tributaries to the Bitterroot can be a blast although the fish are smaller. I agree with the above mention of the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. It really takes a few good days to get the most out of that area. For the kind of camping it sounds like you want to do, you might consider the Lolo Nat'l Forest. Far better access, lots of lakes that can be easy day-trips, a few decent fly-fishig rivers. Hope that helps, and feel free to ask more specific questions.

[JBMasterAngler]

How come a fishing license isn't required to fish within the park (that includes non residents I assume?)? That's great news, as that would be a primary goal for me...but isn't the department of natural resources missing out on alot of money by allowing that?

Also, would it be worth it to buy a license anyway and fish streams/rivers/lakes outside the park, or would I be plenty satisfied with the waters the park had to offer?

[skolfoppa]

How come a fishing license isn't required to fish within the park (that includes non residents I assume?)? That's great news, as that would be a primary goal for me...but isn't the department of natural resources missing out on alot of money by allowing that?

Also, would it be worth it to buy a license anyway and fish streams/rivers/lakes outside the park, or would I be plenty satisfied with the waters the park had to offer?

It is mainly catch and release with many of the most accessible waters subject to restrictions and closures. There is much better water outside the park for chasing trout anyway. National Parks are run by Dept of Interior and I would guess that fishing permits in Glacier wouldn't be a big revenue generator. I always pick up a 3/7 day non resident MT license. Skol.