Maine wears its outdoor traditions proudly. The woods and sea are not only a part of the state symbol but part of everyday life for many here. But the sense that this heritage is departing, or being pushed out by global economic demands, advances in technology, limits on natural resources and the inclinations of succeeding generations, is hard to escape. Maine, as government policy, wants to protect these resources, but what, exactly, is there to protect?

A year ago, the governor convened a conference to assess Maine’s natural resource-based industries. This week, his administration produced a set of indicators for agriculture, fishing and aquaculture, forest products and tourism and recreation. The indicators are not especially shocking unless you believed that anything but tourism dominated this sector of the economy. What the publication “Indicators of Health” shows instead is the direction in which Maine’s economy is moving. It is steered, partly, and it drifts, is carried by prevailing winds and bobs in the backwash of a much larger economy around it.

The indicators also offer scale: count tourism jobs in the tens of thousands; forestry jobs in the hundreds. Contrast the number of farms (up) with the amount of crop acreage (down) against the number of farmers’ markets (up considerably) to get a sense of where farming is headed. Chart the recovery of groundfish stocks as a hopeful sign in that industry.

The “Indicators of Health” report ends where a lot of Maine surveys begin, with the observation that the state lacks adequate data and analysis. That may be because first Maine had to know there was a question to be asked before gathering information for an answer. Clearly, the state’s changing and diversifying economy raises many questions about how it can best use its finite resources to improve its economic conditions. Data was particularly hard to get in tourism, according to the report, and some basic questions have yet to be answered.

These include the following asked in the publication: What higher education credentials are needed, and in what quantity, to supply natural resource-based industries? What are the future labor needs of the industries? Here’s another: What is the likelihood of long-term careers in natural resource fields if Maine invests further in education and training for its residents?

Some of the survey is disappointing, such as when it declares, “Each industry is wonderfully unique, fiercely independent and distinctly separate. And yet, as you look across the sectors, you discover undeniable commonalties and inextricable links.” Does this mean anything? It does. It means Maine is still at the point in which its officials feel the need to talk about fierce independence while simultaneously discussing state development programs. That too is an indicator of economic health.

Like Maine Development Foundation’s “Measure of Growth,” which annually charts with gold stars and red flags Maine’s economic vicissitudes, this latest measure will be valuable over time if it prompts policy-makers not only to note the rise or fall of industries but to probe for reasons. It will be valuable if it helps make where Maine is going less a product of chance and more the result of its own efforts.