A piece of land near Kila that was involved in a public-private exchange with Tim Blixseth in the 1990s may again return to public ownership.
The owners of Haskill Mountain Ranch have been in discussions with federal officials – including Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont. – regarding a possible sale of their 2,660-acre property, which is located about 20 miles west of Kalispell.
Greg Carter, a partner in Haskill Mountain Ranch Inc., said the deal would likely follow the blueprint of The Montana Legacy Project, in which two conservation groups agreed to buy 320,000 acres of Plum Creek Timber Company-owned land for conservation purposes. Carter, who is based out of Whitefish, said the motivation for seeking the deal is public desire.
“This thing is looking like it’s very possibly going to happen,” Carter said. “It’s driven by the public and we’re working with levels of the federal government who are looking favorably on it.”
Haskill Mountain Ranch is divided into two sections: a 2,130-acre area owned by a partnership including Carter and a 530-acre chunk owned by a company called Florida Flathead, based out of Pensacola, Fla. The land is located outside of Kila off of Browns Meadow Road. Haskill Mountain is one of the highest peaks in the area.
The majority of Haskill Mountain Ranch’s acres were once part of Flathead National Forest until Blixseth – the developer of Big Sky Ski Resort’s beleaguered Yellowstone Club – and his business partners spurred a series of land deals with the federal government known as the Gallatin Land Exchange. It was from these deals that Blixseth ended up with the land for his Yellowstone Club.
Nearly two decades ago, Congress passed the Gallatin Range Consolidation and Protection Act of 1993. The bill, which was the first phase of the Gallatin Land Exchange, transferred 37,752 acres of land owned by Blixseth’s Big Sky Lumber Company into public ownership in exchange for 16,278 acres of federal land.
After Big Sky Lumber sold off another 8,100 acres in the mid-1990s, the Gallatin Land Consolidation Act of 1998 swapped 54,000 more Big Sky Lumber-owned acres for 29,000 federal acres. That was the second phase of the Gallatin Land Exchange. While Gallatin National Forest was largely the focal point, other federal lands such as Flathead National Forest were involved, including much of modern-day Haskill Mountain Ranch.
Blixseth, Carter points out, has never had anything to do with Haskill Mountain Ranch.
Along with Rehberg’s office, Haskill’s owners have also had discussions with the U.S. Forest Service, though Flathead National Forest spokesperson Denise Germann said her agency’s resources are too limited to actively pursue a deal at this time. She had not heard about the possibility of involving a third-party conservation group, as Carter is suggesting by using the Legacy Project as a blueprint.
“For us to acquire or swap land is a big undertaking and very costly,” Germann said. “This particular proposal is not a priority for us.”
She added: “No doubt we would appreciate (the land).”
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks’ Region 1 Supervisor Jim Satterfield sent a letter to Haskill Mountain Ranch’s owners on Nov. 16, 2009, expressing his organization’s support of a deal. Officials at FWP have been vocal opponents of development in the area, as they believe the land has wildlife, recreation and economic values.
“It would put some fantastic wildlife habitat back into public ownership – habitat that has an imminent threat of development,” John Vore, an FWP wildlife biologist, said last week.
Kila-area residents have circulated a petition and written letters of support. Among the supporters is the Kila-Smith Lake Community Development Coalition, which filed a lawsuit in 2006 to stop development at Haskill Mountain Ranch. Flathead County Commissioners had approved a 74-lot subdivision on Florida Flathead’s 530-acre plot. While development was planned on the other 2,130 acres, Carter said it never got underway.
In 2008, Flathead County District Judge Ted Lympus ruled in favor of the Kila-Smith Lake group and vacated the subdivision approval. The developers filed again and were approved. The coalition again filed suit and the two sides are negotiating a settlement, according to Jeff Hutten, who is active in the coalition.
Hutten said his group has been “drumming up support” for the proposed private-public deal. Considering the struggling real estate market, he called it “a win-win for everybody.”
“Even if they go through with (development), they’re not going to sell any lots anyways,” Hutten said. “It’s pretty remote. Things near Kalispell aren’t even selling.”
In a letter written to Gates Watson of The Conservation Fund and Glenn Marx of the Montana Association of Land Trusts on Dec. 2, 2009, Kila-Smith Lake Community Development Coalition director Marc Nevas listed a number of uses for the land, including hunting, biking, off-road vehicle riding and grazing.
“It would also return timberlands,” the letter continued, “to the National Forest timber base to help provide much needed timber products and employment.”
Carter said he has been surprised by the outpouring of support.
“There’s a lot more public interest in this happening than we anticipated,” he said.
Jed Link, Rehberg’s spokesman, issued a statement:
“Denny is aware of the situation with Haskill Mountain Ranch and has been in contact with the current owners and the Forest Service. At this point, he’s still gathering information, first to determine if his involvement is appropriate and then to find a workable solution for all stake holders.”
Germann reminds that, despite the support, “there are people who think it’s an inappropriate way to spend taxpayers’ money,” as is the case in any public-private land swap or sale.
Carter believes a deal is on its way to becoming reality.
“To my amazement, it’s going that direction,” Carter said. “Everything’s working out.”