New Intense & Concerning Legal Battle to Shape GNP’s Future

BUTTE, MT - RIght in the heart of Montana's pristine landscapes, a contentious legal battle is unfolding—one that pins private property rights against the preservation of the state's cherished natural areas.

Get our free mobile app

The outcome of this dispute promises to redefine the balance between development and conservation within Montana's state parks and protected regions.

​

The Origin of the Dispute

John and Stacy Ambler, a couple from San Diego, purchased a 2,300-square-foot parcel of private land within Glacier National Park's Apgar Village in 2019.

Their vision: to construct a home amidst Montana's breathtaking wilderness in its most famous location.

Construction commenced a few years later, involving the installation of a concrete retaining wall and rock footers along McDonald Creek.

However, concerned residents alerted the Flathead Conservation District (FCD), alleging that the Amblers had not secured the necessary permits, thereby violating Montana's Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act.

Legal Proceedings and Jurisdictional Challenges

The FCD ordered the cessation of construction and mandated the removal of the partially built structure, citing unauthorized alterations to the streambank.

In response, the Amblers filed a lawsuit challenging the FCD's jurisdiction, arguing that their property, situated within federal park boundaries, was exempt from state regulations.

They further contended that both the Flathead County planning office and the National Park Service had approved their construction plans. 

In February, a federal judge sided with the Amblers, ruling that the FCD lacked enforcement authority within Glacier National Park, as the state had ceded jurisdiction over these lands to the federal government.

Undeterred, the FCD, alongside the grassroots organization Friends of Montana Streams and Rivers (FMSR), appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court, asserting that state environmental laws should still apply to private inholdings within federal lands.

Broader Implications for Montana's Natural Landscape

This case is emblematic of a broader debate concerning development within Montana's protected areas:​

• Precedent for Future Development: A ruling favoring the Amblers could set a precedent, potentially opening the door for increased private development within state parks and other protected regions, challenging longstanding conservation efforts.​

• Jurisdictional Ambiguities: The dispute highlights the complexities of regulatory authority over private lands nestled within federal properties, raising questions about the applicability of state environmental protections in these contexts.​

• Environmental Conservation vs. Property Rights: At its core, the case underscores the tension between safeguarding Montana's natural heritage and respecting individual property rights—a balance that is both delicate and contentious.

Where We Go From Here

As the Ninth Circuit Court prepares to hear the appeal, the stakes extend beyond the borders of Glacier National Park.

The court's decision will likely influence future policies on land use, conservation, and development across Montana's treasured landscapes, setting a benchmark for how the state navigates the intricate balance between progress and preservation.