The recently completed Northern Forest Lands Study considers a diverse array of economic and ecological conditions across four states with significant differences in conservation laws and goals. The study’s review of 26 million acres in northern New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine is an important tool for understanding the development pressures on a large portion of the forested land in the Northeast and what options the region has for its conservation.

The 70 million people who live within an eight-hour drive of the Northern Forest found the undeveloped land especially attractive in the lucrative 1980s, when land prices were lower and zoning regulations more relaxed. The dash to acquire land has slowed considerably these days but will certainly return in the next economic upswing. Through 28 tax and aquisition strategies on both the state and federal levels and a blueprint for monitoring land use in the future, the study should prove to be an excellent way to prepare for the next wave of development.

One of the first things discovered by the U.S. Forest Service and a task force representing the states’ governors, which worked together to compile the study, was that the Northern Forest shouldn’t be treated as a homogeneous region. Maine’s oversight of its 15 million acres within the study area is more expansive, for instance, than policies in Vermont, with 2 million acres. New York, with 7.6 million acres, has a considerable investment in public lands — most notably in the Adirondacks — while 95 percent of the land in Maine is privately held.

The economic bases of the states vary as well. The high-tech businesses in the southern region of New Hampshire, with 1.2 million acres, could support conservation strategies that Vermont couldn’t afford. Taking these differences in account, the study’s most valuable aspect is its range of suggestions and strategies for the northern forest.

Conservation easements, in which a state would purchase only a land’s development rights, “would make a significant difference in future land use and holds the potential to fulfill many aspects of the vision for the Northern Forest,” the study points out. Easements would be particularly suitable for Maine, which has experienced fewer development and recreation pressures relative to its size than the other three states.

The study also explores the concept of greenlining, in which more stringent conservation zoning is assigned to a designated area. But that strategy, as suggested by the Forest Service for the entire northern forest, could over-regulate private land and unfairly burden the businesses that own it. Edward Johnson, executive director of the Maine Forest Products Council and a member of the Governors’ Task Force for the study, pointed out that the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission already exercises many of the controls of a greenline agency.

An essential recommendation outlined by the study and modified in a more palatable form in the task forces’ accompanying report is the formation of the Northern Forest Lands Council. The advisory council would be valuable in reacting to changing demands and to predict new stresses on the northern forest. One such change identified by the study was the increase of what was described as “new investors,” who purchase tracts up to 100,000 acres with the intent to sell off smaller pieces to developers, conservation groups and camp owners.

The effectiveness of such advice was made clear last week when, just days after the release of the two-year study and the task force’s report, the governors of the four states agreed to increase land purchases and adopt some of the tax strategies outlined by the task force. The governors’ action was a positive step for protecting one of the Northeast’s most valuable resources.