Adding a national park in Maine--NYT article on how hard it is to do
- Thread starter B the Hiker
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
Lawn Sale
New member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2005
- Messages
- 899
- Reaction score
- 97
Oh, this again.
Not going to happen.
There is nothing special about that area to draw people, so if you think Acadia is losing money, just imagine that place.
Not going to happen.
There is nothing special about that area to draw people, so if you think Acadia is losing money, just imagine that place.
Tom Rankin
Well-known member
Care to elaborate?
RoySwkr
New member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
- Messages
- 4,467
- Reaction score
- 285
What the article basically says is that you need local support to create a National Park because that requires an act of Congress and it is unseemly to override local reps, Bill Clinton did designate some National Monuments against local opposition but I think that loophole was closed
As someone who was able to complete my peakbagging in the area before Ms. Quimby bought it, I am aware of the many facets of this issue
What she wants may instead be Federal Wilderness designation for the first area, many National Parks including Yellowstone allow snowmobiles - this could be done as a National Forest or National Recreation Area but see no reason locals would prefer that
I can't see many jobs arising from a Wilderness area - probably more from the recreation portion from fishermen and snowmobilers - and I can see how locals fear that increased scrutiny of surrounding lands by environmental groups may be bad for timber harvesting which is already suffering
Canada is essentially giving away trees from Crown Lands to create logging jobs and there is enough untapped forest in Siberia to saturate the Asian market so forest jobs in the USA may not come back for awhile
As someone who was able to complete my peakbagging in the area before Ms. Quimby bought it, I am aware of the many facets of this issue
What she wants may instead be Federal Wilderness designation for the first area, many National Parks including Yellowstone allow snowmobiles - this could be done as a National Forest or National Recreation Area but see no reason locals would prefer that
I can't see many jobs arising from a Wilderness area - probably more from the recreation portion from fishermen and snowmobilers - and I can see how locals fear that increased scrutiny of surrounding lands by environmental groups may be bad for timber harvesting which is already suffering
Canada is essentially giving away trees from Crown Lands to create logging jobs and there is enough untapped forest in Siberia to saturate the Asian market so forest jobs in the USA may not come back for awhile
Last edited:
Lost Dad
Member
Having traveled the East Branch of the Penobscot River which bisects the proposed national park, I can attest to the remote & tranquil feel to the area. However,
this area is a far cry from either Acadia or Baxter State Park when it comes to attractions to draw people. To me, this would be a river to canoe with some hiking trails mixed in. Anyone who has traveled in our National Parks knows that a very small percentage of visitors stray more than a couple hundred yards off the pavement. This area does not have "view from the car" worthy attractions (unless they pave a road to the top of the lookout near Bowlin Camps)
To imagine that this area will draw a significant number of people is foolish. BSP draws 55,000 to 75,000 people per year; I can only imagine that a new National Park will draw far less people. As it currently exists, this land is accessible to all who choose to use either the river or the IAT (International Appalachian Trail) which both bisect the land. Having the primary attractions already accessible makes it even less reasonable (to me) to consider making this area a National Park. Maybe, if they lowered their sights, people might accept a National Forest. But making a stand, National Park only, will only make the process so much more difficult.
Add in all the "traditional use" arguments & the historic mis-trust of the federal government by the residents north of Portland and you can quickly see that this will be a long, long battle.
To see how to get something like this done, take a look at how & why the state preserved the Bigelows with the Bigelow Preserve Act. The Bigelows are protected by the same state Public Preserve program that protects the Mahoosucs. I am sure that this type of protection would be very palatable to the residents of Maine.
http://portlandphoenix.com/archive/features/01/06/08/Postcard_Bigelow.html
this area is a far cry from either Acadia or Baxter State Park when it comes to attractions to draw people. To me, this would be a river to canoe with some hiking trails mixed in. Anyone who has traveled in our National Parks knows that a very small percentage of visitors stray more than a couple hundred yards off the pavement. This area does not have "view from the car" worthy attractions (unless they pave a road to the top of the lookout near Bowlin Camps)
To imagine that this area will draw a significant number of people is foolish. BSP draws 55,000 to 75,000 people per year; I can only imagine that a new National Park will draw far less people. As it currently exists, this land is accessible to all who choose to use either the river or the IAT (International Appalachian Trail) which both bisect the land. Having the primary attractions already accessible makes it even less reasonable (to me) to consider making this area a National Park. Maybe, if they lowered their sights, people might accept a National Forest. But making a stand, National Park only, will only make the process so much more difficult.
Add in all the "traditional use" arguments & the historic mis-trust of the federal government by the residents north of Portland and you can quickly see that this will be a long, long battle.
To see how to get something like this done, take a look at how & why the state preserved the Bigelows with the Bigelow Preserve Act. The Bigelows are protected by the same state Public Preserve program that protects the Mahoosucs. I am sure that this type of protection would be very palatable to the residents of Maine.
http://portlandphoenix.com/archive/features/01/06/08/Postcard_Bigelow.html
Last edited:
Brambor
Well-known member
Locals would benefit from cleaning up their backyards and at least partially restoring the 'old Maine ways of life', be it farming, ecofarming, animal handling (horses, sheep, cows etc...)
For many, tourism is about enchanting experience that does not exist within your regular way of life. Providing clean and attractive accommodations on 'farms' or natural spots close to outdoor opportunities is the way out for many towns in northwestern Maine.
Bringing in tourists to experience and/or participate in the experience is the way to go. It has worked for decades in Bavaria.
one example:
http://www.bauernhofurlaub.de/hofdetails/waelderlochhof-454.html
Give people a way to enjoy your place, way to walk and bike away from the roads.
The start is to provide a clean, safe and friendly environment.
Not a place where you get tetanus for stepping on rusty nail, get mauled by a rottweiler, get accidentally shot by a gun enthusiast etc.. etc...
Maine is one of the few states that can still provide this pristine feeling of being in nature. This gift should be exploited and strenghtened. I know it's far easier to make Maine another New Jersey but it's also very dumb.
For many, tourism is about enchanting experience that does not exist within your regular way of life. Providing clean and attractive accommodations on 'farms' or natural spots close to outdoor opportunities is the way out for many towns in northwestern Maine.
Bringing in tourists to experience and/or participate in the experience is the way to go. It has worked for decades in Bavaria.
one example:
http://www.bauernhofurlaub.de/hofdetails/waelderlochhof-454.html
Give people a way to enjoy your place, way to walk and bike away from the roads.
The start is to provide a clean, safe and friendly environment.
Not a place where you get tetanus for stepping on rusty nail, get mauled by a rottweiler, get accidentally shot by a gun enthusiast etc.. etc... Maine is one of the few states that can still provide this pristine feeling of being in nature. This gift should be exploited and strenghtened. I know it's far easier to make Maine another New Jersey but it's also very dumb.
peakbagger
In Rembrance , July 2024
The individual, George Smith former executive director of Sportsmans Alliance of Maine, is not that well respected these days in Maine hunting circles. He used to have a independent cable show that he sold out to Maine Audubon society and it has become a mouthpiece for Maine Audubon, the connection isn't a secret but to a casual viewer they wouldn't realize that many of the interviews are staged to advocate for Audubon's agenda. Audubon's agenda may be good or bad, but rural Mainers have inherent distrust of "folks from away" and Maine Audubon is inherently viewed as "from away".
Quimby's son and daughter have been inserted into fray as they can not do much worse than their mother. Granted some roads closed by mom were reopened and some non core lands were opened to hunting, and recently they have even put up simulated National Park type signs but its basically regarded regionally as just a holding pattern.
The problem I see with the park is sort of like the US buying the land next to Acadia or next to the Smokey Mountains without owning either, sure it serves a nice backdrop but everyone really wants to visit the actual attraction which is highly unlikely ever going to happen to BSP which is primarily a wildlife preserve with limited facilities for visitors.
Folks do forget that the majority of the voters in Maine are in the three southern counties that tend to act like Boston north, if the southern counties support it the voters in the rest of the state have little chance of defeating and state wide actions, thus the focus has been get it in on federal level and make sure the southern counties go along with it. I personally feel that it would be a great addition to BSP or as Maine public reserve land but I expect that is not high profile enough (I.E. Mom wont get mentioned in the next PBS ken burns documentary).
The reality is that about the only thing Maine has left is wood to pay the bills and most long term projections is that it along with other northern border regions will ultimately benefit from carbon legislation where the wood become biofuel sources, thus any attempt to take land permanently out of timber production is regarded as poor short term planning. Given the expected upcoming devastation from the spruce budworm I expect the woods are gong to be looking quite rough without a viable paper industry to salvage the woods like they did after the last epidemic. It has been while since Maine has burned but give it a dry summer and millions of acres of dead spruces it could get interesting.
Quimby's son and daughter have been inserted into fray as they can not do much worse than their mother. Granted some roads closed by mom were reopened and some non core lands were opened to hunting, and recently they have even put up simulated National Park type signs but its basically regarded regionally as just a holding pattern.
The problem I see with the park is sort of like the US buying the land next to Acadia or next to the Smokey Mountains without owning either, sure it serves a nice backdrop but everyone really wants to visit the actual attraction which is highly unlikely ever going to happen to BSP which is primarily a wildlife preserve with limited facilities for visitors.
Folks do forget that the majority of the voters in Maine are in the three southern counties that tend to act like Boston north, if the southern counties support it the voters in the rest of the state have little chance of defeating and state wide actions, thus the focus has been get it in on federal level and make sure the southern counties go along with it. I personally feel that it would be a great addition to BSP or as Maine public reserve land but I expect that is not high profile enough (I.E. Mom wont get mentioned in the next PBS ken burns documentary).
The reality is that about the only thing Maine has left is wood to pay the bills and most long term projections is that it along with other northern border regions will ultimately benefit from carbon legislation where the wood become biofuel sources, thus any attempt to take land permanently out of timber production is regarded as poor short term planning. Given the expected upcoming devastation from the spruce budworm I expect the woods are gong to be looking quite rough without a viable paper industry to salvage the woods like they did after the last epidemic. It has been while since Maine has burned but give it a dry summer and millions of acres of dead spruces it could get interesting.
Tom_Murphy
Member
The "all or nothing" emphasis on the land becoming a NATIONAL PARK does seem to suggest this is ego-driven rather than altruistic.
David Metsky
Well-known member
Here are some previous threads on the subject for readers not familiar with the topic:
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?2231-Maine-Woods-National-Park
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?39988-Proposed-Donation-for-a-Maine-Woods-National-Park
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?34699-New-National-Park-in-Maine
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthre...al-Park-Wilderness-protection-to-multiple-use
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?14804-The-quot-New-quot-Maine-woods
Mike P.
Well-known member
Iowa is easier to get to; if you build it out in Maine, I'm not so sure they will come. (I'm thinking we'll take the family to Acadia, we had family go the last couple of years)
natron
New member
national park, doubtful, baxter is the big draw in those parts and due to it's location baxter is still overall, lightly visited. the proposed park, would make a nice preserve or land trust. could be awesome if they made a big trail network for mt.biking (ala carrabassett valley) and a big network of hiking trails that connect into baxter for overnight backpack options . however, this idea of a "park" seems to be more about getting tourist to drop coin up north, rather than creating awesome recreational activities for the future.
Stan
Well-known member
As one whose planning core of trips around the country are national and state parks, I can understand some sentiment in favor of nationalizing some land. However, I am against it here because the model of preserving working forests in Maine is, well, working quite well. It provides recreational access, some of which would undoubtedly be severely curtailed along with a way of life that has long existed and which would be, IMNSHO, a disaster to loose. Access, roads and campsites are available without public funding. The state already has effective competencies in managing wildlife and natural features.
I'm from "away" but am behind Mainers who want to preserve "life as it should be" and not as some far away bureaucrat thinks it ought to be.
A combination of additional conservation restrictions, state acquisition of critical lands (maybe some modest expansion of Baxter Park) and private forestry practices which share lands generously with recreational users such as North Maine Woods can be far more effective, efficient, economic and responsive to residents and users alike than a nationalization model in creating wildlife corridors and preserving lands.
I'm from "away" but am behind Mainers who want to preserve "life as it should be" and not as some far away bureaucrat thinks it ought to be.
A combination of additional conservation restrictions, state acquisition of critical lands (maybe some modest expansion of Baxter Park) and private forestry practices which share lands generously with recreational users such as North Maine Woods can be far more effective, efficient, economic and responsive to residents and users alike than a nationalization model in creating wildlife corridors and preserving lands.
