Plum Creek Should Seize Compromise

By John W Porter ial page

The process guiding the application of Plum Creek Timber Co. to rezone and develop its lands around Moosehead lake does not lend itself to negotiation and balance without some extraordinary effort on the part of the state and Plum Creek.

That leaves the people on the extreme edges of the conservation community in a good, if risky, position. If the Land Use Regulation Commission is left with only the choice of an up-or-down vote of what is now before it, that could make development very difficult for Plum Creek. The company could be sent back to the beginning of the process after a grueling and expensive review.

Or, it could mean the state has to live with a plan that sacrifices valuable lands and shorefront in the name of much-needed progress.

As we’ve noted in our editorials, Plum Creek has been forced into a game of "bring me a rock" with conservationists and regulators. As each version of its plan is reviewed by agencies and commented upon by stakeholders, Plum Creek has gone back and revised it – putting more land in conservation here, tightening up an easement there.

BRINGING FORTH THE ROCKS

Each time, Plum Creek has no clear idea if its revisions will mean approval. So, from Plum Creek’s point of view, what it hears is, "Bring me rock." And then, "No, not that rock, a different rock."

But the overall plan, which calls for resorts in and around Lily Bay and Big Moose Mountain as well as hundreds of new house lots throughout the region, still represents the most ambitious development project ever undertaken in the North Woods. Given how much of the land around Moosehead is owned by Plum Creek, its proposal amounts to a master plan for one of the state’s premier wilderness districts.

Last week, the LURC staff said publicly what many people have been saying privately since the latest version of the Plum Creek plan went out to public hearings several months ago: The plan as it stands is too ambitious, especially when it comes to the environmentally sensitive areas around Lily Bay and Long Lake.

Rather than urge approval or disapproval of the plan now before the commission, however, the staff recommended changes to the plan that would make it acceptable to the letter and spirit of the law.

The suggestions in the report appear to be thoughtful, and Plum Creek would be wise to study them carefully. They include many details, but the overall sense of the report is that Plum Creek should scale back its plans and put more of the really valuable property into conservation.

No doubt, the changes would be hard for Plum Creek to swallow. Scaling back a resort and including fewer homes on the water as well as fewer boat slips strike at the most profitable kinds of development contemplated by the company.

But that’s always been the source of tension. Plum Creek has shown a great deal of flexibility when it comes to setting aside hundreds of thousands of acres for conservation, but has moved slowly on suggestions that it do less when it comes to those things that would provide it with a high return on its investment. That’s to be expected. Plum Creek has a financial obligation to its shareholders.

STATE STEWARDSHIP

But the state’s responsibilities differ from Plum Creek’s. Besides fostering sustainable development, the state must also protect wildlife and natural resources that belong to the public. That’s why there is tension with this application, and why a negotiated settlement between LURC and Plum Creek makes so much sense.

But some Plum Creek opponents don’t want to see that negotiation happen. They argue that LURC really isn’t set up to do that, and urge only an up-or-down vote on what Plum Creek has proposed.

Jym St. Pierre, a former LURC staffer who is now director of RESTORE: The North Woods, said last week that it would be unprecedented for Plum Creek to get guidance from LURC on how it can make its plan more palatable. He argues that the only option is an up-or-down vote.

Well, not quite.

The commission itself is expected to comment on the proposal prior to another round of public comment. Plum Creek ought to listen, and the two sides should do their best to mold the proposal into something that meets with LURC’s approval.

That will, no doubt, have the RESTORE crowd crying foul, but so long as changes are made as part of a public process and there’s ongoing public comment, then LURC can and should strike a balance that is in the public’s interest.

It is becoming apparent that, if Plum Creek wants this development, it has to give up some things that it considers precious: namely, shorefront development, resort development and boat slips.

If it can do that, then the company likely has a good chance to see its development move forward. That’ll be good for the Moosehead economy, even as important lands around Lily Bay and Long Lake are preserved along with the rest of the conservation proposal now on the table.

Originally published by By John W. Porter editorial page editor.

(c) 2008 Portland Press Herald. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.