As the Land Use Regulation Commission begins public hearings this weekend on Plum Creek Timber Co.’s development plan for the Moosehead Lake area, three big questions should guide the comments: Is the proposed development appropriate for the region? Is it in the right places? Is it appropriately offset by conservation?

Addressing these questions will keep the focus on whether the plan – for hundreds of house lots and two resorts – meets LURC criteria for development. These include a demonstrated need for the development and that the change will have no adverse impacts on existing uses and resources. Conservation must also compensate for development.

Nearly three years ago, Plum Creek first applied to LURC to rezone more than 20,000 acres near Moosehead Lake to allow for development as part of a lake concept plan, which allows the company to develop faster than under other LURC rules but requires compensatory conservation. Since then the plan has been revised several times.

On the positive side, one resort was moved from a more remote area to near the existing downhill ski area, nearly half the development proposed for shorefront lands and remote ponds was moved elsewhere, and the amount and location of the land required to be set aside for conservation has improved.

On the other hand, the number of house lots – 975 – has remained constant and the development still sprawls over an area stretching from Kokadjo to near Jackman. A conservation framework, a private agreement to preserve more than 300,000 acres negotiated by the timber company and the Nature Conservancy, Forest Society of Maine and Appalachian Mountain Club, still hinges on LURC approval of the development proposal.

Studies have shown that Maine would benefit from more high-end tourism offerings like those included in the Plum Creek plan. Such development, however, must be in the right place and of the right scale so as not to ruin the natural character that draws tourists to the area.

Analysis by state and federal natural resource agencies suggests the character will be degraded by the proposed development. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and other agencies submitted written comments in September in which they concluded that the plan’s drawbacks outweigh the benefits. The agencies say habitat will be lost for loons, bald eagles and Canada lynx; fishing quality will be lowered; and recreational access to the woods will be reduced.

“The anticipated increase in development and its associated demands will forever change the characteristics of the region,” read the joint comments submitted by IF&W and the Maine Natural Areas Program. “We are not aware of mitigation or conservation measures that can fully offset the permanent changes that will result from the full build-out of a proposal of this magnitude.”

Plum Creek is to be commended for offering a vision for tourism and economic development in the Moosehead Lake region in the absence of a state plan. Its vision, however, is only one of many possible scenarios. LURC must decide if it is the right one.