Ever driven through West Glacier and spotted that half-finished, three-story skeleton of a house sitting right on the banks of McDonald Creek? It looks out of place. It looks, honestly, like something that shouldn't be there.
If you've followed the local news in Montana lately, you know exactly what I'm talking about. This isn't just a neighborly spat over a blocked view. The Glacier National Park home jurisdiction dispute is a full-blown legal cage match that has basically called into question who actually owns the rules inside one of America’s most iconic landscapes.
Is it the State of Montana? The Federal Government? Or is it a "wild west" scenario for the lucky few who own private land inside the park boundaries?
The house that started the fire
Back in 2022, John and Stacy Ambler, a couple from San Diego, started building a 2,100-square-foot home in Apgar Village. If you know Apgar, you know it’s tight. The lot is a tiny "inholding"—a piece of private land that existed before the park was even a thing in 1910.
There are about 100 of these private slices of pie left in Glacier. Usually, people keep it low-key. Not this time.
The Amblers didn't get a "310 permit" from the Flathead Conservation District (FCD). In Montana, if you’re going to dig up a streambed or build next to a perennial creek like McDonald Creek, you need that permit. It’s the law. Or so everyone thought.
When the FCD found out, they weren't just annoyed. They were livid. They ordered the house to be torn down. They told the Amblers to remediate the bank and basically erase the whole project.
The Amblers didn't reach for a sledgehammer. They reached for a lawyer.
Why the Glacier National Park home jurisdiction dispute is so messy
Here is the weird part. The Amblers sued the Conservation District in federal court, arguing that the state of Montana has zero authority to tell them what to do.
Why? Because back in 1911, the Montana Legislature "ceded" exclusive jurisdiction over the park land to the United States.
Basically, the state said, "It’s your problem now, Uncle Sam."
📖 Related: Gomez Palacio Durango Mexico: Why Most People Just Drive Right Through (And Why They’re Wrong)
The "Exclusive Jurisdiction" Trap
In February 2025, U.S. Magistrate Judge Kathleen DeSoto dropped a bombshell. She sided with the homeowners.
Her reasoning was pretty straightforward but also kinda terrifying for environmentalists. Since Montana gave up its power over the park land over a century ago, state laws passed after that handover don't automatically apply inside the park.
The Montana Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act—the very law the FCD was trying to enforce—wasn't passed until 1975.
See the problem?
According to the ruling, because that law didn't exist when the jurisdiction was handed over, it has no teeth inside Glacier's borders. The state's regulatory arm essentially stops at the park gate.
What about the Feds?
You’d think the National Park Service (NPS) would just step in and stop it, right?
Well, it’s complicated.
The NPS is great at managing federal land. But when it comes to private property (inholdings), they have surprisingly few tools to regulate how you build your house. They can't just apply local zoning because, well, there is no local zoning in a national park.
It’s a "jurisdictional vacuum."
The FCD argued that what happens on private land doesn't stay on private land. If you mess with the bank of McDonald Creek on your 0.05-acre lot, you’re affecting the water quality and fish habitat for the entire park. "The impact you make on private land immediately impacts federal land," their attorney, Camisha Sawtelle, argued in court.
But the judge wasn't moved by the environmental logic. She stuck to the jurisdictional math.
The Blackfeet Perspective: A different kind of dispute
While the headlines are all about a couple from California and a creek-side mansion, there’s a much older and more profound Glacier National Park home jurisdiction dispute happening on the east side of the park.
The Blackfeet Nation has been fighting for their rights in the "ceded strip" for over a century.
In 1895, the Blackfeet sold about 800,000 acres to the U.S. government. They were starving. The buffalo were gone. They needed the $1.5 million to survive. But the deal was supposed to let them keep hunting, fishing, and cutting timber there as long as it remained "public land."
When Glacier became a National Park in 1910, the government basically said, "Actually, this isn't 'public land' anymore—it's a park."
And just like that, those treaty rights were functionally erased.
Recent wins for the Tribe
Unlike the Ambler case, which is about building rights, the Blackfeet dispute is about sovereignty and traditional use.
For years, tribal members were arrested for "poaching" on their own ancestral lands. It wasn't until the 1970s that they even won the right to enter the park without paying the entrance fee.
Today, things are shifting. You’ve probably seen the Sun Tours buses—the only tribal-owned tour operation allowed in the park. That was a hard-won battle by Ed DesRosier, who fought the NPS for years to prove that the 1895 agreement gave him the right to run a business in his own backyard.
What this means for you (and the park)
If the Ambler ruling holds up through the appeals process—and yes, the FCD and groups like "Friends of Montana’s Streams and Rivers" have already appealed to the Ninth Circuit—it could be open season for inholding owners.
✨ Don't miss: Garden City Weather SC: What Locals Know That Tourists Usually Miss
Imagine:
- No state septic regulations.
- No state building permits.
- No streambed protection.
It’s a nightmare scenario for park planners. If the state can't regulate and the feds don't have the specific laws to do it, these tiny private islands become lawless zones in terms of development.
What most people get wrong
People think the National Park Service is all-powerful. They aren't. They are bound by the same weird, dusty 100-year-old legal documents as everyone else.
Most visitors assume that every inch of Glacier is "protected." In reality, the park is a patchwork. When you’re walking through Apgar or parts of the North Fork, you might be stepping off federal land and onto a "sovereignty hole" where the rules are currently being rewritten by a guy in a black robe.
Actionable insights for the future
The Glacier National Park home jurisdiction dispute isn't over. Not by a long shot. The appeals could take years.
If you're a fan of the park or a property owner in the area, here is what you need to keep an eye on:
- The Ninth Circuit Appeal: This is the big one. If the appellate court reverses Judge DeSoto’s decision, the "310 permit" will be back in play, and the Ambler house might actually face the wrecking ball. If they uphold it, expect a surge in construction on other inholdings.
- Federal Legislative Fixes: There’s talk in D.C. about "assimilating" state laws. This basically means Congress could pass a law saying, "Hey, whatever the state rules are for building near water, those apply to private land inside parks too." It’s a simple fix, but getting anything through Congress these days is... well, you know.
- Blackfeet Co-Management: Look for more moves toward "co-management" on the east side. The Park Service is slowly realizing that the Blackfeet have a legal and moral claim to jurisdiction that predates every Californian with a blueprint.
- Inholding Buyouts: The Land and Water Conservation Fund often provides money for the NPS to buy these private lots when they come up for sale. If you want to see fewer of these disputes, supporting the "willing seller" program is the most direct way to turn private land back into public park.
For now, that half-built house on McDonald Creek stands as a monument to legal ambiguity. It’s a reminder that even in the "Crown of the Continent," the lines on the map are often written in disappearing ink.
Next Steps for Park Advocates:
If you want to stay informed on the legal filings for the Ambler case, you can track the "Flathead Conservation District v. Ambler" case via the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. For those interested in the tribal jurisdiction side, the Blackfeet Nation's official website often posts updates on their ongoing treaty rights negotiations with the Department of the Interior.
Awareness of these boundaries is the first step in ensuring that the "exclusive jurisdiction" ceded in 1911 doesn't become a loophole for modern-day degradation. Keep an eye on the Ninth Circuit—their decision will set the precedent for every National Park in the West.