To a first-time visitor, the waters of Bear Lake shimmer like turquoise glass on hot summer days — a picture-perfect lake surrounded by quaint agricultural towns along the Utah-Idaho border. But residents like Rachael Johnson say this place has seen better days.
She calls it her “home lake.” Raised in Montpelier, Idaho, the 51-year-old remembers when the lake felt untouched and open, when those who called it home could swim, camp, and wander unimpeded for miles along its shoreline.
“Now that’s all gone,” Johnson said, “and they’re focusing on this almost urbanization of this beautiful, wild lake.”
She isn’t alone in feeling this way. Utah State University’s Community and Natural Resources Institute recently released a survey revealing growing worries about rapid development, environmental challenges and changes to the area’s character as populations and tourism increase.
The institute spent months last year interviewing residents of Garden City and Laketown in Utah, and Montpelier, Bennington, Paris, Fish Haven, and St. Charles in Idaho.
Between 2020 and 2023, the populations of Rich County, Utah, and Bear Lake County, Idaho, mushroomed by nearly 6%, the USU research shows.
The majority of those interviewed expressed concern that current growth and development plans do not sufficiently consider environmental impacts.
“It’s just broke my heart,” Johnson said. “It’s a delicate ecosystem, and it’s very unique. I just hate to see, for greed and to make some green bucks, that they’re going to kill this beautiful lake, and they’re well on their way.”
Growth’s catch-22
Alex Theophilus, lead author of the USU report, said year-round and part-time residents he interviewed shared worries about an increase in developing the Bear Lake area to accommodate a rise in tourists and newcomers.
While many residents see the need for affordable housing — especially for workers and young people raised in the area — they worry new subdivisions are springing up too quickly, often in seemingly environmentally sensitive areas, Theophilus said.
These developments, residents say, threaten cherished recreation areas and scenic views that they’ve long valued.
“It’s kind of a catch-22,” Theophilus said.
Business owners shared concerns that a lack of affordable housing forces employees to commute long distances, he added. Yet, many also expressed that the developments currently in the works target wealthier tourists and new residents.
“A lot of people had a concern that the development that is going on around Bear Lake,” Theophilus said, “isn’t necessarily catered toward the needs of the community.”
An example residents find bothersome is Seven Mile Ranch, a luxury residential development under construction in St. Charles, Idaho. The project will add 140 homes along nearly a mile of previously undeveloped shoreline.
Theophilus said that many expressed fear the development’s location — adjacent to wetlands — could harm the lake and its surrounding ecosystems.
Attempts to reach Seven Mile Ranch’s developers for comment were unsuccessful.
Surveyed residents also worry that wildlife is feeling the pressure of ongoing development, Theophilus added, with some expressing concerns about disruptions to habitats and migration corridors, along with fears for the long-term survival of some species.
“People are fairly fearful that they could lose some of the things that really matter to them,” Theophilus said, “especially people who live around the lake year-round. The thought of not being able to continue generational traditions, like interacting with wildlife and waking up to see beautiful mountainsides and the beautiful lake is something that people do not want to lose.”
While nearly every resident Theophilus spoke to mentioned some form of development negatively impacting the community, there was also a shared sense that economic growth is, nonetheless, preferable to economic decline.
“Development is just something that you need to work with and plan thoroughly,” Theophilus said, “rather than just kind of doing it willy-nilly. It’s better to have some development than no development at all, in most people’s eyes.”
‘A very complicated system’
Mitch Poulsen, executive director of the Bear Lake Regional Commission, which coordinates with local governments and manages growth and development around the lake, said he sees the growing pains as “perspective issues.”
Many residents who answered another community survey said development around Bear Lake feels like it’s happening too fast, he said.
Building permit data, however, shows that overall construction has stayed fairly steady, with some busy periods like during the COVID-19 pandemic, when people wanted to get away from cities.
“Compared to someplace like Logan,” he said, “I’m sure we pale by comparison.”
Some community members have welcomed the new businesses and amenities that come with growth, he said, including new restaurants and retail shops in Garden City. Poulsen said the Utah side of the lake is generally more open to growth.
“We’ve got an Ace Hardware that we can shop at,” he said, “and people are like, ‘Hey, that’s really convenient. I really like that.’ And there are other people that go, ‘Is there any way that we can just put up a gate now that I’m here and not let anybody else in?’ And that’s OK.”
There are other differences between the two states, too. In Idaho, new homes within 1.5 miles of the lake must connect to a shared sewer system. This rule has helped protect the environment, Poulsen said, even though the sewer system is now full.
Among the most commonly raised concerns during the USU interviews was the increasing density of septic systems near the lake.
Some neighborhoods rely on septic tanks, stoking fears among residents about the potential for sewage to leak into the water. Others worry that existing sewage systems won’t be able to keep pace with the expanding number of homes.
In Utah, Garden City requires sewer connections, but many other areas still use septic tanks. Because of this, Poulsen said, Utah is studying how septic systems affect the lake and is looking for better ways to manage water runoff.
“It’s a very complicated system,” he said, “and you’re dealing with personalities as well. Not everybody just wants to jump on board. There is a contingent out there that’s very pro-growth and a bit leery of government intervention, even when the government intervention appears to help protect the lake.”
Brady Long, executive director of the environmental nonprofit Bear Lake Watch, said while many residents fret about growth, it is inevitable and cannot be stopped. There is a need to manage and guide development carefully, he said, to reduce harm to the environment.
“For future growth, I think they’re [the Bear Lake Regional Commission] doing an excellent job,” Long said, “and they’re being cautious, and I think that’s what we need, is caution.”
In the meantime, he said, it’s important to keep a close eye on the many aging septic systems around the lake, some of which are decades old.
Long also said more visitors mean more growth, and more growth means more funding through Utah’s state park on the lake, which can directly support environmental stewardship.
He said he hopes Idaho adopts Utah’s approach, in which park-generated funds stay within the park system to be reinvested.
‘It will always happen’
While some longtime residents bemoan the growth around Bear Lake, others have helped shape it.
Norm Mecham, an independent developer and proud Bear Lake resident from Fish Haven, has spent much of his career building around the lake.
He has developed multiple subdivisions and led a variety of construction projects — on the Idaho and Utah sides — primarily focused on second homes.
He said everyone — whether they’ve lived around the lake for 20, 50 or 70 years — deserves the chance to enjoy it.
“It’s somewhat disingenuous if they want to put up a gate after they get here,” Mecham said. “What if the gate had been put up a year, or a day, before they moved here?”
Growth around the lake comes with positives and negatives, Mecham said, but it’s to be expected in a place so beautiful. “It will always happen,” he said. “So, I think the key is to manage it in a way that can be more positive.”
For Mecham, that means placing more controls on where development happens and how much is allowed. Still, he said, growth around Bear Lake is modest compared to other parts of Utah.
“Pick a resort area in Utah like Park City,” he said. “In the last 50 years, Park City has grown exponentially. Bear Lake has not. Have we grown? Yes. Is it just a rural agricultural community anymore? No, it’s not. But the growth that’s happened here, I think, has been fairly sustainable.”
Lake Tahoe can guide Bear Lake
Jeff Nielson, a research assistant professor of watershed sciences at USU who has studied Bear Lake for two years, said residential and commercial development around lakes often increases the flow of sediment and nutrients into the water. That’s largely due to landscape disturbances that make soil more prone to erosion and generate more runoff.
While sediment and nutrient inputs are natural and even important for lakes, he said, problems arise when they become excessive. Bear Lake’s natural low levels of nutrients make it particularly vulnerable to such changes.
Even small increases in sediment and nutrient loads can lead to significant water quality problems, Nielson warned, such as “decreased visibility, color shifts — from blue to green or brown — and harmful algal blooms, which can produce toxins, unpleasant odors and alter water chemistry in ways that endanger fish and other animal populations.”
He added that some of the lake’s fish are already being affected by increased sediment and shifting sand, especially those that depend on rocky areas of the lakebed.
Septic systems around the lake add to the problem, he said. Even well-maintained systems can contribute to nutrient pollution.
Nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus can seep from septic systems into the lake through underground flows, Nielson said, especially in sandy soils and areas with shallow groundwater.
In other lake-centered communities, septic systems have long been banned entirely.
Bear Lake shares many characteristics with Lake Tahoe, Nielson said, including size, elevation and governance by two states. Both bodies of water also carry local, state, regional, and national importance.
Lake Tahoe, however, is further along in development and planning. Because of that, Nielson said, it can serve as a model for Bear Lake.
For instance, California and Nevada banned septic systems around Tahoe in 1972 and worked together to remove all treated wastewater from the basin.
Nielson said Bear Lake communities and developers should adopt low-impact development techniques, similar to those used around Tahoe, to protect the lake’s water quality over the long term.
One example he mentioned is using permeable pavement, which helps reduce runoff from hard surfaces and limits sediment and nutrient pollution tied to new development.
And stronger policies offering incentives for sustainable building, he said, could encourage wider use of these practices.
“I urge communities around Bear Lake to learn from similar lake-centered communities like Lake Tahoe,” Nielson said, “and emulate the policies, programs and strategies that have supported immense growth and preserved the ecological health of Lake Tahoe.”
A way toward preservation
Wendy Fisher, executive director of the nonprofit Utah Open Lands, said that while development often feels inevitable, private landowners have the option to protect their property for future generations.
In the Bear Lake area, nearly 1,000 acres have already been preserved through conservation easements facilitated by the nonprofit.
These easements prevent land from being developed or altered in ways that would harm its natural or agricultural value.
Voluntary tools like conservation easements, Fisher advised, are among the most effective ways to balance growth with preserving open space and quality of life.
“We often see development as a foregone conclusion,” she said, “but equally valuable is the private property right to preserve your land.”
At this time of change, she encourages Bear Lake residents to speak up.
“Let your leaders know how much you value some of these landscapes and what it would mean if these landscapes were lost,” Fisher said. “We all know once that land has been turned into concrete, it’s not going to become a productive farm field again.”
