loading...
In the BDN’s editorial on June 13, it suggested that development in Maine’s wildlands is not a problem any of us need to worry about. You based your conclusion on work done by the Northern Forest Lands Council on parcels of land greater than 500 acres.
Sign in or Subscribe to view this content.

In the BDN’s editorial on June 13, it suggested that development in Maine’s wildlands is not a problem any of us need to worry about. You based your conclusion on work done by the Northern Forest Lands Council on parcels of land greater than 500 acres.

Your conclusion, unfortunately, is wrong.

Since the Northern Forest Lands Council completed its work, Maine’s Land Use Regulation Commission has conducted more specific and detailed studies of development patterns in Maine’s unorganized territories in the last 20 years.

Those studies show that, while the amount of development may not be a problem (although it has increased at least 44 percent in the last 20 years and is projected to increase at similar rates in the future), the location of that development is. Most of the development has occurred on lands that the public cares about the most — lake fronts, scenic areas, riverbanks and other shore fronts.

Land that is subdivided and developed is less likely to be open for recreational use by the public. The development of shoreland areas can harm wildlife that use those areas for feeding, shelter, nesting and travel.

Smaller parcels are also less likely to be managed for commercial timber production. Studies produced for the Land Use Regulation Commission estimate that the Maine economy is losing between $26 and $48 million dollars a year from the 56,000-104,000 acres that are no longer used for timber production because they have been subdivided and developed. The same amount of development could have been accommodated without the losses to the economy if it had been done in a different way.

Maine’s North Woods can accommodate the amount of development that is projected to occur in the next decade without adverse impacts on public recreation, wildlife habitat and the forest products economy. But to do so will require changes in existing regulations so that future development does not occur in and destroy the best places.

To turn a blind eye as your editorial suggested is to guarantee the eventual suburbanization of Maine’s nicest wildlands. Catherine B. Johnson Natural Resources Council of Maine Augusta


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

By continuing to use this site, you give your consent to our use of cookies for analytics, personalization and ads. Learn more.