The admonition “don’t burn your bridges” warns against rash behavior that makes retreat impossible. Nobel economist Tom Schelling argues that to the Roman army burning bridges, or boats, was actually an effective military strategy. By making retreat impossible, the generals signaled their choice to conquer or be killed. This concentrates the minds of friends and foes. It demonstrates a serious commitment.

Another compelling example of a commitment is to promise to quit smoking and give a friend a $1,000 certified check made out to the American Lung Association. The check is to be mailed if you backslide. There are similar strategies for those addicted to gambling.

Such strategies are obvious and easy to understand, but what about burning one’s bridges in front? Can precluding options be a rational strategy? It can—Ramona and I did it when paying a large (to us) sum to put our place in a conservation easement with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust. Here’s the logic.

We love our place and the Gallatin Gateway area that is our home. We’ve been here a long time and expect to stay, ideally until we die. We want to preserve the rural character of our ranch and its surroundings. Consider the options. Many are remunerative but destructive of what we treasure more than money.

Our place has a state certified gravel pit on a bench a half-mile south of our buildings. We mined it for use on our ranch roads and gave some gravel to a few neighbors. We never sold gravel.

A developer from Florida approached us with a proposal to develop our pit. He estimated our return, and explained the mining and reclamation process. While it would have been highly profitable, it would have disturbed us, our neighbors, and the wildlife we enjoy. We decided the social and environmental tradeoffs weren’t worth the financial returns.

Due to its location and environmental amenities, our place was also prime for subdivision development. It’s on a paved road a mere 10 miles from Bozeman and half an hour from Big Sky. We have lots of 1866 and 1883 water. The land includes more than a mile of the Kleinschmidt Canal. Wortman Creek also flows through it, and we have a small spring creek feeding five ponds filled with large wild trout.

Given these features, we were often approached by developers. They explained the possibilities, all far more profitable than ranching. “Were we interested in a subdivision of ranchettes?” they asked. No, not really, even though we like those of our neighbors across the road. We’d rather keep habitat intact for the Cottonwood elk herd.

To accomplish this and not sacrifice all potential for our children, we worked for several years with the late Scott Doss. Scott was a landscape architect we liked and trusted and whose work we admire. Together we divided the land into three large parcels, each having a two and a half acre building pod, with 96 percent in permanent open space. Scott designed environmental standards to preserve the character of the land and quality of habitat when they are sold.

We also have a bluff near the road that may be an ideal site for a cell tower—if one could ignore its visual assault. Once installed, we’d have the initial lease payment and a monthly check to spend or invest. We would capture all the financial benefits and suffer only a small fraction of the ugliness. All who drove by to their homes, to Big Sky, or to Yellowstone would have their scenery despoiled. These structures would deface the beauty of our area. Surely our neighbors would think less of us. And with good reason. There are many less obtrusive places to place a cell tower than in the view corridor of the historic Gateway to Yellowstone area.

We precluded these three opportunities by transferring development rights to Gallatin Valley Land Trust and creating an endowment to monitor our pledge to preserve open space. We burned bridges before us. We’ll never again face the temptations of despoiling what we treasure—our privacy, wildlife, and the esteem of our neighbors.

The market process offers this flexibility. And we’re glad. Aren’t you?