I think it is difficult to overestimate how much other rural internet providers have over-promised for their federal $$. I know that in my area (northwestern Montana), a variety of ISP's have received rural internet funds, and it seems like a fair bit of money has been spent on very little additional high-speed coverage. There are many towns from 350 - 2000 population that are under-served, even with a lot of federal subsidy (I'm told the local telco removed internet capacity from our town of 400 to provide it to a nearby school system. I know that if I pay $5K to get a telephone wire to my house, I can have dial-tone, but not internet, not because of distance, but because of capacity limits.) Perhaps when those ISP's applied for their grants, they simply underestimated the costs.
Regardless, we do have Starlink, and it is transformative.
Southwest Montana here: your situation sounds much worse than ours. I did have to build my own Wisp to get service to my home but in town there is decent HFC and fiber loop if you can afford it. I'm curious if you know for sure that you have regional backhaul capacity limits. I ask because I hear stories from local people here, including folks who should be better informed because they work in city planning, about limited connectivity. Their picture of the connectivity situation is wildly innacurate, in part because providers don't disclose the details of their installed plant.
My understanding is that the local telco (centurylink) would just as soon not be here. It certainly seems unwilling to make the investment necessary to provide more connectivity. Some smaller communities have limited fiber (Babb, St Mary) but there is none in East Glacier and Browning.
I see. So those towns are still microwave-fed? Around here I don't think we have any towns left that are microwave-fed. Gardiner had backhaul fiber installed a few years back. That was the last connectivity hole I'm aware of in this area.
Regardless, we do have Starlink, and it is transformative.