Californians build house in GNP. FCD demands halt and removal.

[Straight Arrow]

Seems regulations should have been in place prior. mtmuley

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!

 

[mtmuley]

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

 

[Straight Arrow]

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

Last year or so. Look at post #84 with a tv news clip about it. Post #10 shows an image.

 

[mtmuley]

Last year or so. Look at post #84 with a tv news clip about it. Post #10 shows an image.

I'll look, but that home was well under construction. And as I said, how the heck does it fly under the radar to get that far? I build homes like that. I know the time-line. mtmuley

 

[Straight Arrow]

I'll look, but that home was well under construction. mtmuley

That is true, but circumstances point to public's complacency and lack of field representatives and enforcement of stream laws until someone hollers.

Are you implying that it's okay to build something in noncomformance as long as you can get it mostly constructed before anyone notices?

 

[mtmuley]

That is true, but circumstances point to public's complacency and lack of field representatives and enforcement of stream laws until someone hollers.

Are you implying that it's okay to build something in noncomformance as long as you can get it mostly constructed before anyone notices?

Are you implying that it's okay to build something in noncomformance as long as you can get it mostly constructed before anyone notices?

No. Absolutely not. But this isn't what happened as far as I can tell. And if it did, where the Hell were the agency's that are tasked with keeping track of it? I know how long it took to get that home to that stage. mtmuley

 

[noharleyyet]

mtmuley's expectations for authoritative diligence are not unreasonable...

 

[Caseknife]

All we can hope now is that Mother Nature takes care of it. Do agree with @mtmuley, where were the regulating authorities a year and a half prior?

 

[Straight Arrow]

mtmuley's expectations for authoritative diligence are not unreasonable...

I agree, but realize there are places in Montana that don't get much attention. (summer cabins, complacent residents, people minding their own business) That is until a white elephant shows up on the very edge of one of the most pristine streams in Montana and someone floats by in July.

FCD doesn't have personnel who are in the field looking for violations. FCD has their hands full with usual 310 permit process and oversight. (bridges, culverts, diversion canals, ponds etal.)

 

[Straight Arrow]

But this isn't what happened as far as I can tell. And if it did, where the Hell were the agency's that are tasked with keeping track of it?

Yes, that is exactly what happened. There are no agencies with oversight regarding inholdings, esp in the national parks apparently. That is essentially what the judge decided; no authority over inholding construction. Obviously the Park Service pays no heed to what happens on those private properties within the park.
Why it took so long for it to be on FCD's radar screen is a good question.

 

[Flatbrimmer]

????

Harley got it apparently…

It’s a reference from an old Brennen Frazier/ Jen Anniston flick. (Office Space) There was literally another meme with the same dude, where he says “maybe I’ll burn the building down”, but I didn’t think it wise to put that one. Anyone that’s seen the movie knows what Milton does when they kept pushing the little guy around…

 

[Straight Arrow]

Harley got it apparently…

It’s a reference from an old Brennen Frazier/ Jen Anniston flick. (Office Space) There was literally another meme with the same dude, where he says “maybe I’ll burn the building down”, but I didn’t think it wise to put that one. Anyone that’s seen the movie knows what Milton does when they kept pushing the little guy around…

Sorry ... we don't get out much. 'Guess the movie isn't old enough for me to have any recollection.

 

[mtmuley]

Why it took so long for it to be on FCD's radar screen is a good question.

This. Big time. mtmuley

 

[brymoore]

 

[peterk1234]

If they followed zoning or the lack of it, they have every right. My question is, how did the materials and equipment get in there? And if it's forestry road, no limitations on what it may be used for?

 

[mtmuley]

If they followed zoning or the lack of it, they have every right. My question is, how did the materials and equipment get in there? And if it's forestry road, no limitations on what it may be used for?

It's interesting nothing was noticed. mtmuley

 

[Forkyfinder]

View attachment 359897

Personally im doing a snow dance so the runoff can wash away the eyesore to be replaced by legal fees for damage and clean up.

What dumbarsery.