Plum Creek Timber Co.’s large-scale “lake concept” development plan, even after the latest round of modifications, strikes me as artificial, profit-driven and out of synch with Maine’s core values.

When you read the fine print, a vision emerges of some half-dozen cruise ships suddenly arriving as a permanent part of the landscape, peopled by wealthy seasonal residents with attendant services and vehicles, unintegrated and out of scale with the existing community. Yes, new development would bring needed jobs and economic opportunities to the area, but at what cost to Moosehead’s historic image as a premier destination for outdoor recreation and authentic North Woods ambiance? And at what cost to the fabric of the existing community? Since all of Plum Creek’s proposed development would be in the Unorganized Territory, no property taxes would be paid to the towns of Greenville and Rockwood, which would bear a lot of the effects.

Taking a wider view, how would large-scale development around Moosehead affect property values and future conservation opportunities all across Maine’s North Woods (former paper company lands) once Plum Creek’s high-ticket property sales are used as comps in appraisals and assessments? The prospect of the Moosehead region becoming another Lake Tahoe, Winnipesaukee, or Sebago is bad enough, but an even greater concern is that Plum Creek’s plan (allowing rezoning of former working forestland for six-story resorts, luxury second homes and supporting commercial development) would further inflate lakefront values and set a precedent for sweeping changes across what remains of New England’s north woods.

Lakefront property, already marginally affordable for Maine residents of average income, would become attainable only for the wealthy. And conservation of Maine’s former lake-and-forest lands would become much more difficult. Thanks to timely, focused action in recent years on the part of conservation groups (including The Nature Conservancy) supported by private and public funding, some important tracts have been protected from this kind of development, but in the wake of Plum Creek’s development and rezoning plan (if approved by the Land Use Regulation Commission), future lakeshore conservation and local ownership – not just around Moosehead but across Maine – may become next to impossible.

At face value, the “Conservation Framework” proposed by Plum Creek and its conservation partners, The Nature Conservancy and the Forest Society of Maine, looks like a “once-in-a-lifetime” trade-off – an opportunity to conserve a large area of northern forestland including some water frontage on remote ponds and wetlands, the centerpiece of which is Number 5 Bog, a longtime goal of TNC.

But I’m not so sure protecting these areas from development – a large proportion of which seem to consist of backlands and areas that would be difficult to develop anyway, not to mention various options Plum Creek wants to retain for alternative development – would really balance the long-term effects of such a large-scale development plan.

I don’t think TNC is looking at the entire “big picture.” Larger effects of Plum Creek’s current plan could include degradation of significant wildlife habitat at Lily Bay and elsewhere, debasement of the image of Moosehead as an authentically “Maine North Woods” recreation destination, and the potential loss of an established tourism base as loyal visitors become disenchanted with the commercial sprawl overtaking the region.

Granted, a new seasonal population would bring new economic development to the region, but how well integrated would it be with the existing community? And what would it demand? Who would provide fire and police protection, ambulance service and road maintenance? Would local property owners be able to afford to stay on their land? How would the Moosehead precedent affect the rest of Maine’s privately owned North Woods lake country in terms of property valuation, preservation of important wildlife habitat, and public access to undeveloped lakeshores, ponds, streams, and forests?

For me there are still too many questions, too many loopholes and too much fine print.

Let’s hold out for a significantly scaled-down proposal from Plum Creek that truly responds to widespread public concern; there will still be balance-conservation opportunities here.

It’s in Maine’s best interest to ask LURC to deny Plum Creek’s latest iteration of its still-massive development plan and keep saying “no” until presented with a plan brought down to a much smaller scale – a scale that would not overwhelm the existing human and natural communities and preserve the values that make Maine the place we want to be.

Express your concerns and comments to LURC in writing to 22 State House Station, Augusta 04333; via e-mail to LURC@maine.gov; or by attending one of the upcoming public hearings. For information about Plum Creek’s proposal and scheduled hearings, go to www.nrcm.org.

Jane Crosen Washburn, a freelance editor, writer and mapmaker, lives in Penobscot.