Just went back and re-read it in Walton Goggins televangelist voice. It’s incredible.There's a career waiting for you as a late night born again TV evangelist.
Californians build house in GNP. FCD demands halt and removal.
- Thread starter Sytes
- Start date
Wildabeest
Well-known member
That is one massive ogre of a building right along that stretch.
I've seen houses along the Clark and Bitterroot in city/county while floating though in GNP along McDonald river... i sure hope these out of State chumps get a swift 310 kick in the ass!
That house stands out like tic infestation hell when skinning a spring bear!
I've seen houses along the Clark and Bitterroot in city/county while floating though in GNP along McDonald river... i sure hope these out of State chumps get a swift 310 kick in the ass!
That house stands out like tic infestation hell when skinning a spring bear!
sapperJ24
Well-known member
The house can stay.
"The absence of any real regulation over private inholdings means that the Amblers’ partially completed three-story home, the construction of which the FCD’s board of supervisors placed under a cease-and-desist order in April 2023, exists in a sort of jurisdictional limbo and can remain."
“In sum, the Court concludes that FCD lacks jurisdiction to enforce the Streambed Act on the Ambler Property because Montana has ceded exclusive jurisdiction over all land within the boundaries of Glacier National Park — including private inholdings — to the federal government,” according to DeSoto’s order.
“In reaching this conclusion, the Court is bound by the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Macomber, which held that Montana’s cession of jurisdiction over Glacier National Park included not only the public lands dedicated to park purposes by the United states but all privately owned lands within the described park boundaries,” DeSoto wrote, adding that “by this cession and acceptance, federal authority became the only authority operating within the ceded areas.”
Although state law “theretofore applicable within the ceded area at the time of the cession was assimilated as federal law … the Streambed Act was not in effect at the time of the cession and was not assimilated for the reasons explained above,” DeSoto wrote in the order. “Accordingly, under binding Ninth Circuit precedent, FCD lacks jurisdiction to enforce the Streambed Act on the Amblers’ private inholding within Glacier National Park.”
Federal Judge Rules in Favor of McDonald Creek Homeowners - Flathead Beacon
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that a California couple who built a home without a permit on the bank of McDonald Creek in Glacier National Park did so legally, and that a local conservation district that ordered the home’s demolition, as well as the damaged streambed’s restoration, has no...
flatheadbeacon.com
"The absence of any real regulation over private inholdings means that the Amblers’ partially completed three-story home, the construction of which the FCD’s board of supervisors placed under a cease-and-desist order in April 2023, exists in a sort of jurisdictional limbo and can remain."
“In sum, the Court concludes that FCD lacks jurisdiction to enforce the Streambed Act on the Ambler Property because Montana has ceded exclusive jurisdiction over all land within the boundaries of Glacier National Park — including private inholdings — to the federal government,” according to DeSoto’s order.
“In reaching this conclusion, the Court is bound by the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Macomber, which held that Montana’s cession of jurisdiction over Glacier National Park included not only the public lands dedicated to park purposes by the United states but all privately owned lands within the described park boundaries,” DeSoto wrote, adding that “by this cession and acceptance, federal authority became the only authority operating within the ceded areas.”
Although state law “theretofore applicable within the ceded area at the time of the cession was assimilated as federal law … the Streambed Act was not in effect at the time of the cession and was not assimilated for the reasons explained above,” DeSoto wrote in the order. “Accordingly, under binding Ninth Circuit precedent, FCD lacks jurisdiction to enforce the Streambed Act on the Amblers’ private inholding within Glacier National Park.”
trackerbacker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2023
- Messages
- 531
Weird..
....
Who was looking for an 'i told you so'?
But shh......listen up.....don't stop watching FCD (what they have done, and are doing) and a few other yocals.
....
Who was looking for an 'i told you so'?
But shh......listen up.....don't stop watching FCD (what they have done, and are doing) and a few other yocals.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
trackerbacker, I reluctantly give you a "I told you so" since your opinion of the litigation was validated.
However, I will not concede that it is just wrong! The caveat is a hopeful followup by FCD and this issue raised to a judiciary level that will make it right.
Perhaps the just rewards for this couple will be sneering unwelcoming neighbors and McDonald Creek floaters giving the one-fingered salute as they drift by the Amblers, who are trying to enjoy a sit on their deck or a barbecue on the stream banks. Also, there may one day be a gush of flood water that creates a very unstable base for supporting posts and for an ill conceived foundation.
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
????
trackerbacker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2023
- Messages
- 531
Wonder if the neighbors were welcoming...at all..
.gov righted the wrong.
Go look at any of the public info, every step of the way fcd/mt was wrong. Go look at any map with datasets.
Quite evident, you chose the bootlicking side. 'tear down their house'. Losers.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Quit gloating!
trackerbacker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2023
- Messages
- 531
Only when it's wore out it's welcomeQuit gloating!
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
We are way past then!
trackerbacker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2023
- Messages
- 531
?
The winning just started? A judged backed (the data) that lead to the ambler's victory.
Fcd/mt will appeal, and hopefully relief in many ways will come the ambler's way (holding costs alone, plus legal fees), still with nothing other than 'we don't like outsiders, we feel this, we feel that, despite hard facts to the contrary.
There's still civil issues I hope they rack up continual victories over.
Sit there, look back at all those cheering for the ambler's destruction, judge yourself amongst them, long before you criticize me for gloating.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
I do each and everyday. I am disgustingly imperfect. Which is why sometimes I wish there were a middle-finger emoji available.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Wildabeest
Well-known member
The problem I have here is that it exploited a unique legal loophole that circumvented the spirit of legislation regarding development in this area.
Just another case of “legal vs moral”, and moneyed interests doing what they please at the expense of natural beauty and the local community.
Just another case of “legal vs moral”, and moneyed interests doing what they please at the expense of natural beauty and the local community.
I agree. And while I don't necessarily agree with what the Ambler's have done, if it was all legal not much to talk about. I also think it is hard to believe that that home got to that level of construction it did without someone noticing it. Seems regulations should have been in place prior. mtmuley
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Therein lies the problem in that the federal judge has ruled that essentially there are no regulations for building within GNP boundaries. Flathead Conservation District (FCD) imposed a cease and desist order to halt the contruction on the banks of the creek in violation of Montana Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Law (310 permit law) but the judge says that portion of McDonald Creek inside Glacier NP is outside the authority of the FCD and not subject to Montana's stream laws. There was some discussion of a permit requirement for construction, but apparently that's not a hard and fast rule. Sadly, this sets a precedent for development on GNP inholdings and perhaps any federal land inholdings that the landowner can do whatever they wish ... without permits or any rules, regulations, or constraints whatsoever.
Hopefully this isn't the end of this issue as it's just not right in so many ways!
When was that cease and desist order imposed? How far along in the construction process? Again, I don't agree with the Ambler's building there, but it seems too little too late as far as the process went. mtmuley
