Missoula, MT — A legal battle has erupted over the construction of a private home in Glacier National Park, as the Flathead Conservation District and Friends of Montana Streams and Rivers have appealed a federal judge’s decision to allow the property to remain. The home, located on the banks of McDonald Creek, was deemed controversial due to concerns over its potential impact on the park’s delicate ecosystem.
Magistrate Judge Kathleen L. DeSoto recently ruled in favor of the homeowners, John and Stacy Ambler, stating that their private residence could stay on the property. The ruling followed a challenge from the Flathead Conservation District, which argued that the Ambler’s home construction violated environmental regulations, particularly the Streambed Act, which governs alterations to stream beds and banks.
The conservation district had contended that the Ambler’s project lacked the necessary permit required for construction near the creek, which could potentially harm the stream’s integrity. However, Judge DeSoto found that the district did not possess the jurisdiction to enforce the Streambed Act on private land located within the boundaries of Glacier National Park, essentially allowing the construction to continue.
The decision has sparked strong reactions from local environmental groups, who argue that the preservation of the park’s natural environment should take precedence over private property rights. The Flathead Conservation District has since filed an appeal, seeking to have the ruling overturned, and the case is now set to be reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The opening briefs for the appeal are due on May 28, 2025, marking a significant next step in the legal proceedings.
This case highlights the tension between private development and environmental protections within the boundaries of national parks, raising questions about the balance between conservation efforts and property rights in protected areas. Environmental advocates continue to voice concerns over the long-term impact of such developments on the park’s fragile ecosystems, while property rights supporters assert that the Ambler’s home was legally constructed and should be allowed to remain.
As the legal process unfolds, the future of the controversial home and its implications for the management of Glacier National Park will likely remain a focal point of debate.
