Paul Travis finds himself having a familiar conversation with people he meets across the Flathead Valley.
They’ve often moved from bigger, out-of-state cities and release a sigh of relief as they settle into the idyllic arms of rural Montana.
“They say they wanted a place that hasn’t been ruined like so many other communities in our country,” Travis says. “They say, ‘The quality of life used to be good. Then everything got developed and we lost all that open space and scenic beauty. That’s why we moved here.’”
Travis, executive director of the Flathead Land Trust, can’t help but feel heartburn every time this type of conversation plays out, as it brings to light the catch-22 situation that is increasingly playing out in the valley.
The Flathead Valley is in the midst of seismic changes as its population and urban development swell. This is the second fastest growing area in the state behind only Gallatin County. Flathead County is poised to hit 100,000 residents for the first time this summer, while large-scale development keeps emerging.
The valley’s commercial and residential expansion is prompting concerns over urban sprawl and its effects on the rural identity of this corner of Montana.
“We’re just seeing development happen very quickly,” Travis said. “It’s caught like wildfire. Let’s think through this and think about the best places to develop and the places we don’t want to lose.”
“Strong development is good for our community and our economy,” he added. “We just feel like there needs to be a balance. Otherwise, we will hit the point where it starts going downhill.”
The Flathead Land Trust was founded over 30 years ago by a group of community members who saw the likelihood of urban growth in the years ahead and wanted to preserve some of the valley’s original rural character. The organization works with families who want to preserve their legacy lands, most often agricultural properties, through voluntary conservation easements that allow for existing conditions and activities but prevent future development or industrialization.
In Travis’ mind, preserving certain rural lands is good for both the economy and quality of life. His primary concern is the type of so-called spot development that surfaces away from existing urban areas and infiltrates the rural outskirts.
“It not only detracts from open space values and gobbles up farm ground; it’s also, from a cost standpoint, more expensive to get infrastructure and emergency services and all those things the county has to pay for to accommodate these developments,” he said.
Travis reiterates that he and the land trust are not anti-development; instead, he advocates for good judgment that considers the big picture and long-term implications.
“Not every piece of land needs to be conserved,” he said. “There are appropriate lands that should and can be developed. But there are special places that have these things that are unique and full of conservation values, and we don’t want to lose those if we can help it.”