The Land for Maine’s Future program committed the last of its money last year. So, as lawmakers consider whether Maine should borrow money to pay for infrastructure and other projects, the lack of money for land acquisition should be a concern.
Members of the Appropriations Committee have agreed to a $5 million bond for LMF. It needs approval from the Legislature and governor — who has said he doesn’t support any bonds until the state budget is “balanced” — before the bond proposal would be put out to voters.
Letting the program die for a lack of money is not a responsible outcome. Instead, approving a small infusion of money while LMF takes a year or so to better define itself and its priorities could be beneficial. The program is being moved from the State Planning Office to the Department of Conservation.
The Land for Maine’s Future program remains popular with voters — a $9.75 million bond package for the program was supported by 57 percent of voters in 2010.
The Legislature established the program in 1987 during Republican Gov. John McKernan’s administration. The booming 1980s saw real estate speculation and demand from retirees carve up land that most locals expected would always be open. In addition, the legacy paper companies that owned most of the North Woods were changing hands, putting the future of leased camps and hunting and fishing areas in jeopardy.
The idea was simple: borrow money, create a board that identified key parcels that met a specific criteria and purchase them from willing sellers. And the purchased land had to be open to the public.
The legislation put it this way:
“The Legislature declares that the future social and economic well-being of the citizens of this state depends upon maintaining the quality and availability of natural areas for recreation, hunting and fishing, conservation, wildlife habitat, vital ecologic functions and scenic beauty and that the state, as the public’s trustee, has a responsibility and a duty to pursue an aggressive and coordinated policy to assure that this Maine heritage is passed on to future generations.”
In the early years, large tracts of often remote land were preserved. In more recent years, the borrowed money was used in conjunction with local land trust money, private and corporate donations and seller discounts to buy land with scenic views, farms and waterfront access for fishermen. To date, following multiple referendums in which voters endorsed borrowing $126 million in all, the program has preserved more than 530,000 acres.
Land for Maine’s Future funds have been used for dozens of projects, including Mount Kineo on Moosehead Lake, Cutler’s Bold Coast and the 329,000-acre West Branch of the Penobscot River project. The program also has acquired land or conservation easements on 1,000 miles of shorefront and 8,000 acres of farmland.
In July 2011, a board distributed the final $9.25 million available for conservation and recreational projects.
A recent economic analysis by The Trust for Public Land — a national conservation organization that has worked on several projects in Maine involving Land for Maine’s Future — estimated that the return on investment for the program was $11 for every $1 spent. The analysis calculated the economic value of goods and services from the lands protected through the program, including in the forest products industry and from nature-based tourism.
LMF has been beneficial to Maine. Now the program needs to prioritize the places or types of land that continue to need protection as part of building its case for another round of funding.
Is this just another perpetual government program without boundaries or limits?
Liberals just love to spend on bond issues
This whole program was suppose to be a one year thing, back in the Angus years. They created a whole new department that they can’t afford to run let alone buy more land.
Neither the state nor the federal governement needs to own any more land to take out of the tax base.
Not only that Sue…. the remaining private land becomes too expensive for normal mainers to own. The only people that benefit are developers, out of staters and Quimby types.
The government owns far to much land. The state nor the fed has any need nor reason to own land with no infrastructure on it.
I would like a figure of the total of lost tax revenue the past 20 years. The ‘investment’ Picture says it all, Kineo. While the Elite recreate on the dime of tax payers, Greenville is dying to prop up the place for wealthy visitors whose spread crumbs on only the items they forgot to buy before they arrived and yes maybe a few bucks in a few establishments that are seasonal jobs and pay no benefits. There is virtual no employment opportunities fulltime, good paying, yearround employment in Greenville.
Irish,
Are you suggesting that LMF is the reason for all these hardships you point to? Would any one travel all that way to Greenville were it not pristine and wild and beautiful? Isn’t that the primary economic attraction?
I agree with you that a healthy economic base is a diverse one. Look at Bar Harbor in the winter..dead to the world. A healthy economy cannot be built on summer tourism alone or even on multi season tourism.
Would Greeville have any economy at all though were it not for the pristine beauty of Moosehead Lake & environs?
The Lands for Maine’s Future program is an excellent way to “conserve” certain special parcels of land in Maine.
” … To date, following multiple referendums in which voters endorsed borrowing $126 million in all, the program has preserved more than 530,000 acres. …”
How much of that $126 million (plus interest) has been paid off? No more debt until the balance is paid! Stop spending money we don’t have; our grandkids should not have to pay OUR bills!
State policies need to be consistent and should follow the will of the people. If 57% of the people value and are willing to support land for maine’s future (LMF), what are our state legislators doing furthering things like metal mining and 2000′ highway/energy corridors?
The jobs and economic development that are needed and should be supported in natural growth centers like Lincoln and Houlton are not at all incompatible with the goal of LMF but the behavior of our Transportaion Committtee andour Natural Resources Committtee certainly is inconsistent with LMF.
All public acquisitions and investments should be strategic and coordinated to synergize and inter-support one another. Instead we are embarked in this administration on a dismantling of LURC and of the State Planning Office to make it easier to give it away willy nilly to JD Irving , Nestle and any other Corporation that walks through with a profiteering scheme sold on imaginary local jobs and growth.
Maine will never experience any real growth when all we think about is “conserve”. We need to evaluate what we have for resources and how best to use those resources for the majority of Maine people, not just the Angus Kings and Roxanne Quimby’s of the world.