Northern Mainers have good reason to be concerned about their economic future. Employment opportunities associated with the forest products industry are declining. Over the last two decades 8,000 jobs have been cut and state agencies predict that job loss will continue. Limited economic opportunities have led to population declines in many areas. Clearly an economic development strategy of “more of the same” hold little hope for the hard working families who live in this spectacular region.

I recently completed an economic analysis of the proposed Maine Woods National Park that explored whether that proposed land use strategy would hurt or help the Northern Maine economy. I took on this project because I thought my experience in the Pacific Northwest, where both timber and national parks are an important part of our economies, might provide some insights relevant to Maine.

The conclusion I reached from that study is that the proposed park would neither do significant damage to the northern Maine economy nor would it lead to a boom that would transform the region. Both sides in the debate over the proposed Park tend to exaggerate the economic impacts. My analysis indicates that over a 20-year period, while a Maine Woods National Park was gradually put into place, the Park would have a modest net positive impact, supporting the creation of about 3,600 net additional direct jobs in the area immediately around the park. Given that the area around the proposed park has been losing population in recent years, this projected economic vitality would help reverse these losses and stimulate modest expansion. Only about a quarter of the jobs associated with new permanent residents and businesses drawn to the region by natural amenities of the area would be protected by the proposed park.

The blanket assertion that creation of the proposed Park will choke off all economic activity by removing land from the timber base is not plausible given the economic experience associated with almost all other large national parks across the nation. As my study documents, almost all the rural counties adjacent to large national parks have shown signs of economic vitality, expanding jobs and income, that far surpass that now found in northern Maine.

Nor is the opposite fear plausible, that the park would generate explosive economic growth that would destroy the Maine way of life. Although rapid growth has hit a few gateway communities, it is not the typical pattern. Because national parks primarily support amenity-related economic development, not primarily tourist development, adjacent communities tend to experience balanced and diverse development.

Often the public debate over the proposed Maine Woods National Park has been tied to an incomplete way of looking at the economy. The debate has tended to present a forest products versus tourism choice: Maintain all of the northern forests for commercial timber purposes or be driven to reliance on a congested, low wage tourist economy. These are not the choices northern Maine faces.

For at least the last quarter century, regional economic development has been driven not by specialization in natural resources or heavy industry but by the location decisions of people and businesses as they have pursued what they perceived to be higher quality living environments. That

is what has energized the economies of the desert southwest and the Pacific and Gulf coasts; that

is what has driven the “resettlement” of the

southeast and the mountain West.

Economic development is no longer driven by outside corporations coming in to process a region’s natural resources. Large multi-national firms rarely gallop to a community’s economic rescue; they are better known for galloping away, leaving independent communities in the lurch. Prosperous local economies need to be able to hold and attract entrepreneurs who appreciate the area’s unique characteristics and act to develop the economic potential associated with them.

That is the economic potential represented by the proposed Maine Woods National Park. By providing permanent protection for the landscapes at the geographic heart of the state, it announces that Maine intends to continue to provide one of the highest quality living environments found in New England and the nation. As more and more economic activity becomes footloose and as more and more businesses seek the work force they need by locating in attractive places to workers and other businesses, Maine will continue to benefit by tapping into this new source of economic vitality. This in turn will bring true economic diversification.

That combined with the important ongoing role that forest products and other natural resource industries will continue to play will lay the basis for a vital and prosperous economy in northern Maine for decades into the future.

Thomas Michael Power is a professor and chairman in the Department of Economics at the University of Montana in Missoula.