ALL’S WELL ON THE ALLAGASH

As debate over the Allagash Wilderness Waterway intensifies – at least temporarily – it is important to remember two things. One, the management of the waterway is governed by two agreements, one a legal settlement between the state and federal government. Second, the people who recreate on the river give it high marks.

This latter point is often lost when special interest groups and bureaucrats fret over management of the waterway. A 2003 survey of Allagash visitors, by University of Maine professor John Daigle, found that 74 percent of visitors gave their experience an “A” and 23 percent gave it a “B.” Only four people out of the 439 who answered gave it a D or less. When asked what contributed most to their positive evaluation, the top three answers were good weather, scenic and natural beauty and solitude. The top reasons for a negative evaluation were bad weather, bad fishing and poor water.

On the continuing debate over wildness and traditional uses, waterway visitors seem to think the proper balance has been struck. According to the survey, 94 percent of visitors rated the remoteness of the Allagash as important or very important and 90 percent said they were satisfied or very satisfied with the remoteness. Seventy-three percent of visitors thought a connection to the area’s traditions was important or very important and 85 percent of visitors were satisfied or very satisfied with this aspect of the waterway.

Asked about this, David Soucy, head of the Bureau of Parks and Lands, the state entity that oversees the Allagash, said “We all need to get out more.” The key, he said, is not to measure the Allagash against an idealized notion of wilderness or historical traditional uses, but to consider the outdoor experience that the waterway actually offers. Most people are pleased with that experience.

As the Department of Conservation is in the midst of revising the waterway’s management plan – a plan that will reduce the number of vehicle access points – it is important to remember the plan must adhere to two agreements. The first is a memorandum of agreement between the DOC and the National Park Service that says the state must better align its management of the waterway with the fact that is a federally designated Wild and Scenic River. This includes reviewing the number of bridges, dams and access points.

The second agreement, between groups that have long argued over management of the waterway, was more specific and listed access points that would be closed or modified. The parties that signed onto that agreement in 2003 should not now argue for adding or subtracting access points.

The Conservation Department is close to finalizing a revised management plan that meets the objectives of both agreements. It was overly generous in extending public comment on the plan for another three months. That time should be not be spent re-fighting old battles.

Once the revised plan is in place, the special interest groups should go out and enjoy the Allagash like its yearly visitors do.