Given that there are either seven or 11 or 14 access points along the Allagash Wilderness Waterway, depending on who is counting, the one at John’s Bridge between Eagle and Churchill lakes has attracted an inordinate amount of attention. That is in part because this access, long in use but not official, would come, under Department of Conservation plans, with a parking lot and a loop road. More to the point, however, the access at John’s Bridge represents a growing controversy over the 30 years of changes in the waterway, which has increased there along with the number of roads, access points and expected services from rangers.

A lawsuit announced last week by a half-dozen groups is narrowly directed at stopping the access at John’s Bridge. The suit would be useful if it merely cleared up the question of what sort of access the state is permitted to construct under the Wild and Scenic River Act, through which the Allagash is protected. Better, however, if the outcome of the suit gave Maine greater guidance in its future decisions on the waterway. Better still would involve a broader examination that looked both forward and back to see whether the many changes since Sen. Edmund Muskie and Gov. Ken Curtis won state-administered protection for the Allagash under the federal act were in accord with the intent of the act. A lawsuit may not be the best way to do this, but it may be the most expedient.

So far, much of the discussion since a 1998 DOC report advocating access at John’s Bridge has hovered around the should-not/should-to level, with neither side providing definitive arguments. A lawsuit will require a thorough airing of the history of the act, the intent at the time the Allagash was placed under it and the commitments made or not made by the state of Maine. And these interpretations must stand up not merely to counter arguments at a hearing; the opposing side in a legal dispute will have the resources and time to research and present refutations as it sees fit.

Certainly the intended use of the Allagash has in the last few years been obliterated by the rancor over the DOC’s report. It has set day or weekend users against those canoeing the 91-mile length of the waterway, and turned a tranquil place into a political argument. No lawsuit could clear up all of this, but it could provide direction for more productive discussions in the future.