BREWER – The decadelong battle over liquidation harvesting raged Thursday night at the Forest Resources Association’s monthly forum.

When an investor purchases commercial timberland, harvests it heavily, then sells the cleared land for development, it is said to have been “liquidated.”

Concern over the practice has been building in recent years, with environmentalists and legislators worrying about the permanent loss of forestland.

Maine Forest Service estimates place the problem of liquidation harvesting at anywhere from 10,000 to more than 60,000 acres each year. The most often cited study, done in 1999, indicated that 6 to 8 percent of timber harvested each year is liquidated.

Gov. John Baldacci campaigned on a platform of ending liquidation harvesting. And the Legislature last session passed a bill that charged a group of stakeholders with creating harvesting standards.

However, some landowners and foresters continue to debate whether a major problem even exists.

“Proponents of legislation on this have always said that it threatens the land base through fragmentation and sprawl – I don’t agree with that. They say that it degrades the forest – I don’t agree with that,” said Ken Lamond of McPherson Timberlands.

A panel composed of Lamond, Cathy Johnson of the Natural Resources Council of Maine, Charlene Krug of the Maine Landowners Association, and Andy Irish, an independent logging contractor, addressed the questions and concerns of more than 90 people who attended Thursday night’s forum.

Through much of the evening, the details of forest management were put aside while Johnson debated the heart of the issue with her fellow panelists and a majority of those in attendance.

“Liquidation harvesting makes it impossible for those who want to do good, long-term sustainable forestry to compete. It’s cheaper to liquidate,” Johnson said.

Local economies and the ecology of the forest itself are damaged, she said.

“The land is stripped, wildlife habitat is destroyed … it just disrupts the whole forest system in a way that good forest management, good harvesting doesn’t do,” she said. “That land is not of use for anything but development for 50, 60 years.”

Others characterized the problem as one of political perception or overzealous environmental activism.

“Any landowner should have the right to sell their property for any reason they deem necessary, at any time,” Krug said. “They’re trying to take away the free market and the free use of private property.”

Scott Hanington of Wytopitlock, a logger and landowner who has been accused of liquidating, agreed.

“Being able to own private property and do what I deem fit … it’s kept me in business for the past two years,” he said, noting that he had abided by Maine law.

But Irish, who along with Johnson and McPherson is a member of the stakeholder group, said that the industry must address political realities. People are worried about the sustainability of Maine’s forest industry, he said.

“We’re trying to be reasonable … nobody wants to shut logging down. Nobody wants to hurt forestry,” Irish said.

“But I don’t think you should have to cut your land and sell it to stay in business logging … that’s not sustainable,” he said.

The panel agreed that this divisive issue must be addressed, or Maine’s forest industry could risk a public fight to rival the clear-cutting battles of the 1990s.

“History is not on our side. I hope we’re all smart enough to put our prejudices aside and try to save this industry,” Irish said.

The stakeholder group is scheduled to complete its work later this month and will present its plan to the Legislature in February.