The big bird called an ostrich is notorious for sticking its head in the sand when it doesn’t know what else to do. Maine is rapidly becoming like an ostrich. Governor Baldacci has proven that his ostrich tactic is to create a task force. Got a problem? Let’s create a task force and study it. Of course his task force is most likely to be a secret one.
Just last month, Baldacci waved his magic wand and created a task force that will study public land issues in Maine, including lands and access issues for hunters, trappers and fishermen. The goal of the task force is to inventory all the public reserve lands – that should take about an hour – and then decide how best to use them. What’s to decide? Didn’t taxpayer dollars pay for these lands? Shouldn’t they be left open to everyone unless legitimate reasons show otherwise – and I don’t mean some special interest group’s wants and wishes.
Maine has very little in the way of public lands. The percentage of land owned in comparison to land mass lags most all the rest of the country. Maine is economically depressed because of repeated administrations that believe the way to deal with this is more taxes. The people of Maine are the highest taxed people in this nation.
Troy Jackson, an Allagash, Maine democrat, has proposed LD648, a bill that would guarantee “no net loss” of public lands when making deals concerning public lands. Many states have such a law because government can’t be trusted and there are too many special interest groups willing to use public lands as a bartering tool. A recent example of this in Maine is the Baxter land swap, where the citizens of Maine gave away 7,000 acres of prime real estate – land that was open to all forms of recreation – in exchange for 6,000 acres of which 4,000 became restricted land only for a few special interest groups. There is no law to guarantee that the money received in the very complex land exchange will be used to replace the land lost. This is why a law is needed.
Through the land swap, Maine yielded $5.5 million from the sale of the 7,000 acres. Where has that money gone? What will it be used for? Promises were made but more than likely those promises will turn out to be more lies, as to how that money will be spent. It was just one of the many lies told in order to convince lawmakers to allow the swap to proceed. Of the roughly 600,000 acres of Maine Public Reserve Lands, Maine lost 7,000 acres with no real hope of replacing it with equal quality within the same geographic areas anytime soon, if at all.
But Maine, its citizens and leaders, continue to bury their heads in the sand over public land issues in Maine. They beat the same drum year after year. All they ever say is that Maine has millions of acres of land available for recreation.
Just yesterday, the Boston Globe reported that wilderness land in Maine is being bought up and built on at a rate far greater than urban areas. I’m talking areas with no services. It’s no great secret that one of the most pressing issues facing Mainers is the loss of land access for the recreation it enjoys. Maine used to be the leader in woods products industries but today that has been taken over by tourism and recreation. What will become of Maine’s abysmal economy if there is no land to recreate on?
Today, the Bangor Daily News has an article covering debate of LD648. It appears nobody in the Joint Committee of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife is interested in debating the need for such a law and took the Baldacci approach by sending the matter to the new task force that hasn’t been put together yet. Now that’s leadership!
Look at how everyone is burying their heads. First the writer of the article.
The former public lots will remain open to hunting, trapping and other traditional uses. But some sportsmen were upset about losing access to the 4,000-plus acres added to Baxter. They also worried about the deal setting a precedent for future agreements in which hunting lands are sold or swapped.
Because Mainers are so spoiled by being granted access over the years by the large paper company landowners, etc., they continue to believe this will always be the case. The new owner of the public lots that were traded away, Gardner Land Co., has said he will leave his land open to hunting, fishing and trapping but where’s the guarantee? Like many others that have come before Gardner, they may opt to sell off the land once it has been logged. Then what?
As part of the Baxter land swap, Maine ended up with 2,000 acres of public lands – the very northern portion of the Katahdin Lake parcel. What Mainers weren’t told before the deal was voted on was this 2,000 acres would end up virtually inaccessible. Roxanne Quimby, Maine’s notorious land grabber and preservationist, bought up the one parcel of land that would guarantee future access to that land. Baldacci waved his magic wand once again promising to build a road that would lead to nowhere. This road would lead to more private roads, of which the land owners have expressed they will not guarantee continued access across their lands.
At least Rep. Jackson has some foresight.
“I just think places that people have enjoyed hunting for years shouldn’t all of a sudden be closed off without an additional place being opened” to hunters, Jackson told members of the Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry.
And George Smith, Executive Director for the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, concurs.
“We don’t have a problem right now. We could be looking at a problem, and it’s important to establish this in state law,”
But the director of the Bureau of Parks and Lands doesn’t have a clue.
Approximately 99 percent of Maine’s 620,000-plus acres of public reserve lands are open to hunting, fishing and trapping. The remaining 1 percent is generally campsites, parking areas, trails and other areas where most people agree hunting should be banned, said Will Harris, the bureau’s director.
“Frankly, I don’t think we need it. We are already keeping our land open,” Harris said.
As the old saying goes, “With friends like that who needs enemies?”
One would think that preservationists groups like RESTORE:The North Woods would believe that protecting lands and finding a way to guarantee their existence, would support such a bill. Not true.
Jym St. Pierre, Maine director of RESTORE: The North Woods, said that while the bill may be well-intentioned, he called it “unnecessary and unhelpful.”
I wonder if St. Pierre would voice the same opinion if this land was going to be shut down to only his special interest groups locking out, hunters, trappers, fishermen, snowmobilers, ATVers, etc. that he and his group have so far turned their backs on?
Mainers will one day soon wake up and find they have no place left to enjoy the outdoors. It will either be sold off to all the land grabbing preservationists or put into the hands of special interest groups locking out multiple use. Should we just continue to stick our heads in the sand while at the same time still believing we’ll always have the woods we’ve enjoyed in the past?
Tom Remington
