Cemetery committee likes land near river
Whitefish’s ad hoc Cemetery Committee
has expressed interest in two parcels of land for possibly creating
a new city cemetery. The group is impressed with land near the
Whitefish River footbridge and the city’s sewage treatment pond,
while a plot of state land on Lion Mountain is also of
consideration.
The committee’s objective is to
evaluate possible locations for a cemetery close to the city.
Whitefish’s only cemetery off of Ramsey Avenue opened in 1918 and
has 3,079 lots and 184 crematory sites, but they’re all sold and
privately owned. As a result, several community members recently
have been buried outside the city.
The city purchased land near the Armory
in the 1950s with the intention to create a cemetery, but the land
was found to have high groundwater.
At a June 16 committee work session,
member Ole Netteberg called the land near the river and treatment
plant a “beautiful forest” that he was very impressed with after
taking a city-led tour.
Steve Thompson said that the area was
forested with a nice mix of large and small trees and could work
well for both a traditional and “natural” cemetery.
Other committee members agreed the
city-owned parcel was nice, although there were some concerns about
the potential for foul smells coming from the treatment
facility.
It was noted that many of the trees
there would have to be cleared for a cemetery, which could increase
the chances of smells wafting through the area. It was also noted
that the ponds are “turned” a handful of times a year, which
emphasizes the odors.
Necile Lorang, the city’s
administrative service director, said that most of the complaints
the city gets about the plant’s odors come from people who live
near Shady River Estates. The city received three letters from
neighbors of the treatment plant about the noxious odors and
putting a cemetery there.
A second area of consideration for a
cemetery is near the parking area for the Whitefish Trail off of
Lion Mountain Loop Road. It was also widely considered to be a
nicely forested area that could be ideal.
Downfalls include that it’s outside of
city limits and on Department of Natural Resources and Conservation
land, and that access to utilities could be an issue.
Member Charlie Abell brought to the
committees attention a parcel of land off of State Park Road that
he consider to have potential as a cemetery site.
The committee invited to the meeting
Anthony Gloschat of Johnson-Gloschat Funeral Homes. Gloschat asked
the members whether the city had researched the public’s interest
in creating a new city cemetery. He warned that a cemetery could be
a “highly subsidized venture.”
Member Terry Trieweiler said having a
city cemetery is “part of creating a sense of community.”
Abell added that he believes there is a
great need for a cemetery and “has been for a long time.”
“There are dozens of people buried in
Kalispell that would rather be buried here,” Abell said.
Gloschat agreed that there is a strong
sense of pride among people from Whitefish.
Gloschat noted that with Whitefish’s
greater population of about 10,000 people, there would be about 100
burials a year and that a 10 acre cemetery could last for dozens of
years. He estimated that 80 percent of Whitefish residents choose
to be cremated. Whether the lack of city cemetery space has boosted
that rate in recent years was unclear.
The committee will study at their next
meeting the concept of a natural cemetery. Thompson set up a
seminar with a firm experienced in the arena.
Green burials, as they are sometimes
called, are a way of caring for the deceased with minimal
environmental impact and embalming fluid is discouraged.
It was noted that natural cemeteries
are scarce in Montana, with the closest one in the Swan Valley. If
Whitefish partitioned off a natural area in a new city cemetery,
there was speculation by some committee members that there could be
a demand from people living outside of the city who want to be
buried in a natural cemetery. This could be a good or bad thing,
the committee said.