It's growth, pure and simple, spreading into nearly every corner.
Because growth is often drawn to beauty, much of the new development tends to follow the course of rivers and creeks. That's nothing new, of course. It's just happening at an accelerated rate.
Over the past couple of weeks, planners have taken a variety of proposals for new streamside setback regulations into meetings in the county's major drainages, hoping to hear from residents their thoughts on how best to protect streams and riparian areas.
Streamside setback rules, which are in use all over the nation as well as in other Montana counties, generally regulate where building can occur in relation to streams, as well as other activities landowners might engage in. The goal of such regulations is to protect water quality, habitat and vegetation.
In Missoula County, planners developed the proposed regulations in a partnership with the Clark Fork Coalition, the Missoula-based watershed protection group.
“We've long been interested in streamside setbacks, and we've worked on them at every level of government,” said Karen Knudsen, director of the coalition.
The Missoula County commissioners have also been interested in the possibility of using setbacks, but want to shop the proposals around before enacting any new regulations.
Initially, both county officials and the coalition believed they were on pretty solid ground with the proposals, as survey after survey indicated that Missoula County residents were supportive of protecting streams and riparian areas.
That's why the reaction to the proposals has been something of a surprise.
“I'd have to say that most of the comments are running against the regulations right now,” Waggy said. “And they're very vehement comments. People are having a very strong reaction. It's not everybody, of course, and there's a lot of support in some of these drainages, but the opponents have been drowning that out so far.”
Said the coalition's Knudsen: “It's been hard to have a constructive dialogue because of the way the debate is being framed. I'd have to say I've been a little surprised by the reaction.”
What's happened, for the most part, is a revival of the age-old battle for the West: property rights vs. government regulation.
“First, it just might be the biggest taking of land since the Indians lost,” said Larry Hayden, who lives up Petty Creek. “They are affecting every waterway in the county, even streams that are seasonal. They've got regulations in there that wouldn't allow you to mow your lawn. They're taking away your ability to use your own property.”
Jeff Patterson, a private investigator who lives along the Clark Fork River near Turah, has similar concerns.
“I'm opposed to the county drawing lines on my property and telling me what I can do with it,” he said. “I think at some point this would have a serious effect on property values. There's a passionate outcry about this, and I hope the county is learning a lesson here. I think there's a lesson in this for all of us.”
Waggy says the proposals aren't nearly as restrictive as some have made them out to be, but they would represent a major change in the way Montanans have built along streams over the past century.
“The public has really been telling us that they're concerned about the way that development can affect water quality and recreational opportunities,” said Waggy. “We've seen that in survey after survey. This is a way to assess the possibilities for what we might do about that sentiment. We realize it's a change, but we need to pay attention to the way things are going along our rivers.”
To country folk like Hayden, that sounds like Missoula telling the rest of the county what to do.
“I think people who live along these places know how to treat them,” he said. “But I also think that when people buy property on water, they want to at least be able to see it. With some of these regulations, you might as well just build in a dry field.”
What the regulations look to do is cut down on the disturbance that occurs along rivers and creeks when landowners or developers build houses and other structures such as barns within a stone's throw of a waterway.
If passed as is, the regulations would prohibit building in those close-to-water zones; the bigger the waterway, the larger the setback. Here are the numbers:
Clark Fork, Bitterroot and Swan rivers: 200 feet.
Blackfoot and Clearwater rivers and Rock Creek: 150 feet.
Ninemile, Petty, Lolo, Morrell and Lolo creeks: 100 feet.
All other streams: 75 feet.
Structures such as houses and barns that are already built would be grandfathered in, even if they were destroyed and had to be rebuilt.
Still, those lines strike some as arbitrary, even though Waggy and Knudsen said they are supported by the best available science and are in place and working in other areas.
“It's not as if we just dreamed these up,” said Knudsen. “These regulations are working in lots of other places, and they're working in Montana.
Beaverhead County, for instance, has regulations that affect development near the Big Hole River.
None of which makes folks like Hayden and Patterson feel any better.
“Right now, if you draw a 200-foot line on my property, that's about two-thirds of what I own,” he said. “If you wanted to make people mad, it would be hard to think of a better way than this.”
Said Hayden: “I can understand a reasonable setback, but the numbers they're talking about, they're just taking too much of people's property away from them.”
The county has thus far held eight meetings, and the final one is set for the Seeley Lake Community Hall on Tuesday at 7 p.m. Some of the previous meetings have been anger-filled, and that emotional tenor has made it difficult to have constructive dialogue, Knudsen said.
“We need to have a conversation about these things,” she said. “If there are changes that need to be made - and there are - we'll make them. But it doesn't help anybody for the meetings to go like some of them have gone.”
That is something Patterson agrees with.
“I think there can be a lesson in this for all of us,” he said. “The county needs to hear that people don't want these regulations rammed down their throat. And landowners need to be ready to listen to what the concerns are about our rivers and see if there's something more we can do as landowners. I think landowners want what's best for our rivers, but we also want to make sure that our rights are protected. Those things don't have to be incompatible.”
Knudsen and Waggy said that if nothing else, the public meetings have supplied plenty of new ways to reassess the proposed regulations.
“I can see how we can make some changes that would make this more acceptable to people,” Knudsen said. “But I also think that as people think this through, there are a lot of good things in this for everyone. I think a lot of people who think they would be affected probably wouldn't be.”
Patterson thinks the county could get people to do the right thing for rivers and creeks voluntarily, but he understands the process needs to work itself through.
“What I think we want to see is that the county is willing to work with landowners on this,” he said. “I think everybody's goal is the same thing, and that's to have healthy rivers.”
Reporter Michael Moore can be reached at 523-5252 or at mmoore@missoulian.com
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)