U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Montana
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-10-2009, 09:21 AM
 
Location: Montana
448 posts, read 918,712 times
Reputation: 253

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by eatdrums View Post
Hi Janab.

I have a friend who now lives in Couer De Alene, than moved to Sand Point. I visited him there, and it was beautiful!

Is there property with a couple acres for horses? I don't need the Ponderosa, just a little land.

He loves it in Northern Idaho. Where would you recommend?

My wife and I actually thought Montana might have been less "taken over" than Idaho, but it seems not.

Is Boise is bad because of the crowds, or just don't like outsiders like Montana?

Thank you for the post Janab. That was very neighborly of you!

Best regards!
Sorry I have just checked into the thread after a busy spring. I say stay away from Boise area if possible because it seems where a large population exists you have the "me first, get them before they get me" attitude. Most folks down there are friendly, the traffic is like Sac, Frisco etc. We live in Grangeville,ID and it is the best place going as far as people, population, weather etc. We have been here for 8 years and love it. Sorry to say I am moving to Helena area to be closer to my daughter and grandkids and she wants to help us out in our "old age".
Check out my site to see what this area is like: mtimages's photos and albums on webshots
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2009, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Montana
448 posts, read 918,712 times
Reputation: 253
Hubby and I have been looking in the Helena,MT area and real estate does not come cheap !!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 10:33 AM
GLS
 
1,985 posts, read 4,836,301 times
Reputation: 2408
Quote:
Originally Posted by janab View Post
Hubby and I have been looking in the Helena,MT area and real estate does not come cheap !!!
Just out of curiosity, if you compare "apples to apples", square feet, lot size, similar amenities, how does the real estate cost in Helena compare to Idaho?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Brendansport, Sagitta IV
7,540 posts, read 12,567,152 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
Just out of curiosity, if you compare "apples to apples", square feet, lot size, similar amenities, how does the real estate cost in Helena compare to Idaho?
I've been comparing for the last 3 years or so, and it's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. Minor local variations but overall pricing is very similar. South-central Idaho is maybe a bit cheaper for cropland and that area has been dropping over the past year. Anywhere within driving distance of an Economy is still high.

The main thing I notice with ID farm properties is that water rights is more of a big deal; there are properties that have none, or that are restricted to using the water for a specific purpose, even if it comes out of your own well. I looked at one south of Boise that had a big well but its use was restricted to in-the-house (no landscaping use) and up to 700 head of cattle. NO other water uses permitted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 12:25 PM
GLS
 
1,985 posts, read 4,836,301 times
Reputation: 2408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reziac View Post
I've been comparing for the last 3 years or so, and it's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. Minor local variations but overall pricing is very similar. South-central Idaho is maybe a bit cheaper for cropland and that area has been dropping over the past year. Anywhere within driving distance of an Economy is still high.

The main thing I notice with ID farm properties is that water rights is more of a big deal; there are properties that have none, or that are restricted to using the water for a specific purpose, even if it comes out of your own well. I looked at one south of Boise that had a big well but its use was restricted to in-the-house (no landscaping use) and up to 700 head of cattle. NO other water uses permitted.
I appreciate the info. Just an aside, but it is a sad day when you save to buy your own property, take a risk on drilling, pay for the well, and the government tells you what you can't use your own water for. However, the way things are changing, I guess expressing my opinion is just "watering" upwind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 01:44 PM
 
Location: Brendansport, Sagitta IV
7,540 posts, read 12,567,152 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
I appreciate the info. Just an aside, but it is a sad day when you save to buy your own property, take a risk on drilling, pay for the well, and the government tells you what you can't use your own water for. However, the way things are changing, I guess expressing my opinion is just "watering" upwind.
Comes out of the water wars of the 1800s, when water rights were life or death for livestock and farming, and in the arid west there wasn't enough to go around. But sometimes the way it's applied is just nuts.

It's worse here in SoCal... in north Los Angeles County, the little local water companies have managed to get regs passed that in short, state that if for ANY reason your own well goes out, and you are within their service area, you MUST hook up to their system (for a $15k connection fee, tho their water costs about half as much as pumping it from a well). You can't just repair your well and go on your way (never mind that you may have $40k invested in that well already -- yes, it costs that much here). They are trying to get local wells inspected and condemned, too (very few private wells will pass a rigorous inspection for water quality). I got this from a water company owner's own mouth, it is not hearsay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 07:49 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,952 posts, read 22,448,772 times
Reputation: 15488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reziac View Post
Comes out of the water wars of the 1800s, when water rights were life or death for livestock and farming, and in the arid west there wasn't enough to go around. But sometimes the way it's applied is just nuts.

It's worse here in SoCal... in north Los Angeles County, the little local water companies have managed to get regs passed that in short, state that if for ANY reason your own well goes out, and you are within their service area, you MUST hook up to their system (for a $15k connection fee, tho their water costs about half as much as pumping it from a well). You can't just repair your well and go on your way (never mind that you may have $40k invested in that well already -- yes, it costs that much here). They are trying to get local wells inspected and condemned, too (very few private wells will pass a rigorous inspection for water quality). I got this from a water company owner's own mouth, it is not hearsay.
They do the same thing here in the Flathead with some twists. Many houses here are on well and septic. If your septic fails (and this includes having it pumped) and there's a sewer line within a certain distance you MUST come off septic and hook up. This in total costs runs about $25k including plant investment fees.
While I understand the need to reduce/eliminate septic tanks I think if a city is forcing you to do so they should pay to have it done since they now have a customer (hostage) for the life of the property.

If you get annexed into a city and/OR they lay water lines within a certain distance from your house you MUST hook to city water as well but there's some argument that you "might" be able to keep your well for non-household use as in lawn watering as long as they deem it not a hazard to their water sources. I must say that around here the city water is way nastier than anything my well or most private wells have ever put out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Montana
448 posts, read 918,712 times
Reputation: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
Just out of curiosity, if you compare "apples to apples", square feet, lot size, similar amenities, how does the real estate cost in Helena compare to Idaho?
Well what I can say personally is we have 5 acres, live year round creek, pasture, good well, pond, backed by USFS and wilderness and our home is almost 3k square feet, shop/garage is upscaled with insulation, rv bay, industrial air exhaust and we cannot find anything comparable in the Helena valley area for the price bracket we are asking for our home. We have also come off our price due to the economy 60k and the prices of places have not dropped over in MT. Realestate continues to move also over there! Our taxes here in ID county are nil compared to MT property taxes. For one who is on retirement fixed income it's impossible to think of living in MT. We refuse to end up living in trailer trash residence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Montana
448 posts, read 918,712 times
Reputation: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reziac View Post
Comes out of the water wars of the 1800s, when water rights were life or death for livestock and farming, and in the arid west there wasn't enough to go around. But sometimes the way it's applied is just nuts.

It's worse here in SoCal... in north Los Angeles County, the little local water companies have managed to get regs passed that in short, state that if for ANY reason your own well goes out, and you are within their service area, you MUST hook up to their system (for a $15k connection fee, tho their water costs about half as much as pumping it from a well). You can't just repair your well and go on your way (never mind that you may have $40k invested in that well already -- yes, it costs that much here). They are trying to get local wells inspected and condemned, too (very few private wells will pass a rigorous inspection for water quality). I got this from a water company owner's own mouth, it is not hearsay.
The sad thing is SoCal is over populated on what USED to be desert arid land and made into an oasis that shouldn't be. Now N. Cal is paying for the sins of the rich and famous and powers to be that still have to have their cars washed daily, lawns and exuberant landscapes watered daily and the farmers and residences in NorCal are put on watering restrictions and high water rates and Lake Oroville and Shasta send water to no end to SoCal
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Brendansport, Sagitta IV
7,540 posts, read 12,567,152 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by janab View Post
The sad thing is SoCal is over populated on what USED to be desert arid land and made into an oasis that shouldn't be. Now N. Cal is paying for the sins of the rich and famous and powers to be that still have to have their cars washed daily, lawns and exuberant landscapes watered daily and the farmers and residences in NorCal are put on watering restrictions and high water rates and Lake Oroville and Shasta send water to no end to SoCal
Actually the situation is not quite that. Things had been fairly stable, since for the most part the SoCal desert is water-sufficient (we have vast underground supplies and don't use imported water -- that all goes into L.A.) But even SoCal growth was not the problem:

NorCal farmers were recently stripped of their water rights so that salmon could be reintroduced into the Sacramento River (where they've been extinct for a century, and may never have been a regular resident species in the first place) -- water use was cut off cold-turkey to farms, so the river would have enough water for these fish -- 500 fish introduced at a cost of $500 MILLION dollars. That's right, those fish cost about a million dollars apiece. And they aren't a threatened species; they're ordinary Pacific salmon, such as are common in the Columbia River drainage.

And this we did while in the throes of the worst economy in living memory, in a state that is so far in the hole that investors wouldn't buy CA's latest bonds, and meanwhile foreign food-crop producers are dancing with joy, because all that produce that is no longer coming from CA now has to come from somewhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Montana
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:40 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top