Your article (April 4) left a misleading impression about access to the Allagash Wilderness Waterway and the position held by those of us trying to strengthen the waterway’s wilderness character. There are many ways to get into the wilderness waterway. Traditional access is over portage trails – the most famous is the Mud Pond Carry from the Penobscot watershed. And there are many other trails.

The waterway can be reached by paddling down tributary streams. There are at least a dozen of them. And there are seven float plane landing sites, authorized in the original waterway legislation.

Everyone supports the above access points.

It is motor vehicle access that is controversial. The application to include the Allagash in the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers System, filed by the state of Maine in 1970, proposes two motor vehicle access points, with a possible third. The granting of that application and designation of the Allagash as a “wild” river under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act states that “Public access over private roads will be permitted to and along a portion of the Telos Lake at the southern end of the waterway and to the northern boundary at West Twin Brook. Existing private roads within the waterway which have been developed for logging purposes will be closed to public use.”

Today there are 10 authorized motor vehicle access points plus two motor vehicle accessible camp sites on the river. That is too many drive-up access points. Public access is and should continue to be a high value on public lands. But unlimited public vehicle access is incompatible with a remote, wild and quiet experience on the Allagash. As we all know, the forest road network has expanded hugely since 1970, making driving in much easier. It is not too much to ask the public – any of the public – to make a small extra effort in order to experience the incomparable beauty of a few days in the Allagash Wilderness. To many, that extra effort is a benefit, not a burden.

Many of us, across the state, are working to “develop the maximum wilderness character” of the Allagash, as directed in the Allagash Wilderness Waterway Act, passed overwhelmingly by Maine voters in 1966. We are open to the idea that there should be more than two motor vehicle access points.

Some current vehicle access points should be closed. Some should become trail access points. Personally, I support having more than two drive-right-to-the-river access points. One at each end of the waterway, and a third at Churchill Dam, would allow access to both the southern (lakes) portion of the waterway, and the northern (river) portion.

And there are plenty of other actions, such as purchasing land in the waterway’s mile zone and around important trails and tributary streams, which would improve the waterway’s wilderness character.

The Allagash is for everybody, but “for everybody” can’t, and mustn’t, come to mean “for everybody to drive in to, easily, at any point.” That will eventually destroy the remote experience.

Jon Luoma, of Alna, participates in Citizens to Protect the Allagash and served on the Department of Conservation’s advisory committee to the 1999 Allagash Management Plan.