It was inevitable that the possible (emphasis upon “possible”) sale of up to 3 million acres of forest would spawn a conservation campaign of comparable size. The Wilderness Matters! drive launched Friday by a coalition of familiar environmental groups has the big names and the big plans. Now it needs to accept a small dose of reality.

First, the only land on the market at this time is Sappi Ltd.’s 911,000 acres. The availability of Bowater’s 2 million acres is, for now, mere speculation. Further, Sappi says it is only interested in a buyer that will keep the land in production for the paper industry.

Second — and the Wilderness Matters! coalition of the Forest Ecology Network, the Wilderness Society, the Sierra Club, the Northern Appalachian Restoration Project and RESTORE: The North Woods had better get used to hearing this because it is a truth Maine voters hold dear — the land in question is not wilderness, nor is it the Maine North Woods. It is privately owned working forest that provides a lot of jobs and that has long been open to the public for recreation. And it’s a good bet the traditional Maine definition of recreation is vastly different from that of the coalition members.

The coalition calls for the purchase of most or even all of this land through a combination of private donations and public contributions (that is, state and-or federal money), with the whole caboodle expected to fetch up to $350 million. While details of what the coalition expects to accomplish with the private sector are fuzzy, it is fairly specific on the public side: It wants the state to issue $100 million in bonds.

Such a sum is, of course, utterly unrealistic. One-tenth that amount would be a tough sell; Maine simply has too many other needs and a tax burden that already is too high. But by making the public contribution so prominent in its initial proposal, the coalition also takes on the burden of having to back up its claims of public benefit.

A huge North Woods park, it says, would be an economic boon to the region. To see how this may or may not be true, consider the economic status of the two communities that serve as gateways to two of Maine’s most popular natural tourist attractions: Bar Harbor for Acadia National Park and Millinocket for Baxter State Park. The Bar Harbor region has grown rich on Acadia, but not from selling granola bars and laces for hiking boots; it’s the inns, the restaurants, the pubs, the water slides, the souvenir shops. Baxter, meanwhile, remains more a haven for those interested in getting away from it all and Millinocket has hardly a nickel to show for it. If a grand North Woods park is to be a powerful economic engine, things are going to get awfully noisy in the old forest primieval.

The coalition says the park would open up unparalleled recreation opportunities. Its critics counter by saying the paper companies already do that. The difference is in the type of recreation. Today, campers, hikers and birdwatchers somehow coexist with hunters, fishers and trappers — perhaps being guests on private land engenders cooperation. Some logging roads buzz with ATVs and snowmobiles, some with bicycles. Some provide water access for both power boaters and canoeists. If the coalition envisions any changes in what recreation is allowed, it should include them in its proposal for public purchase. Maine has had far too many loud arguments in the past regarding traditional recreation on newly acquired public lands. It can avoid another only if all parties involved make their intentions clear from the start.

Gov. King already has met with Sappi to discuss the purchase of smaller parcels of particularly high public value around Moosehead Lake and adjacent to Baxter. That approach is more likely to be acceptable to both Sappi and to Maine voters.

The most troubling part of the coalition’s campaign kick-off is the sudden low esteem in which it holds conservation easements and land-trust arrangements, measures (now called half-measures) that once were the darlings of the conservation movement. These have been particularly effective tools in Maine, thanks to their ability to curtail development as the land stays in private ownership. They should not be summarily dismissed, especially given Sappi’s stated preferences.

There are, no doubt, important and significant tracts among the Sappi holdings that should be preserved, whether through outright purchase or easement. But a 3 million-acre wilderness park (or one of 911,000 acres, for that matter) is simply impossibile, both politically and fiscally. Sometimes big ideas just don’t fit into a real world.