Maine Woods National Park
- Login to post comments
Good question Murphy. There is nothing to prevent aliens from owning land in the USA or any improvements on the land. For example, SAPPI is the South African Pulp and Paper Incorporated. They owned the land under the buildings, the buildings and the equipment. Whether it's five acres or millions of acres makes little difference. Canadians owned the mills in Millinocket and the old Eastern FIne Paper company in Brewer. Canadians own the old Fraser mills. They owned the mills at Woodland (Baileyville). Now the Red Chinese own the mill at Woodland.
Paper mills aside, we must remember that there is no paper company land in Maine any more. It has all been sold; mostly to wealthy foundations and hedge fund managers. The world is going to need fiber when the difficulties are over. We'll need to rebuild and we enterprising Americans will not own the resource. Never doubt for an instant that it is entirely intentional. Nearly 20 years ago, Unorganized Territories United obtained strategic plans, maps and taped meetings of radical environmental groups.
I don't know Murphy so I'll explain why no paper company owns land in Maine. The Maine DEP, LURC and the legislature deliberately and with malice aforethought made it unprofitable to own Maine timberland over the long term.
Good comment, Roger.
I don't think I will ever tire of repeating these words;
The best way to preserve the Maine woods is to strive to make it profitable to sustainably grow, harvest, manufacture and sell Maine timber and wood products.
This should be the mantra that our state legislature repeats over and over.
But, I guess it's just a dream.
Objectivist Mon, 08/08/2011 #21: "BlueJay, I noticed that BDN op-ed, and the rather prominent irritation in the comments section about the lack of information about the RESTORE affiliation. I see they have corrected it online late in the day..."
Publishing an op-ed claiming to advocate for "the economy" but written by chairman of the board of Restore George Wuerthner is only one of several such misrepresentations. "Somehow" BDN managed to "miss" identifying him as a lobbyist for a takeover of millions of acres of private property for wilderness until after the comments exposed him, but there is more.
Aside from the advocacy news articles by Sambides and Miller, BDN just published another op-ed written as a very personal, snarling attack on the Millinocket Council. The authors were identified only as: "Marsha Donahue and R. Wayne Curlew own North Light Gallery in Millinocket". Not mentioned is that they are activist leaders in the Quimby campaign, revealed in an earlier BDN article in the recent advocacy series.
They were also shown in the photos for a later article cavorting with the two Quimby representatives from Colorado who came to promote the notion of improving the "economy" with a National Park.
Those two, Bill Pinkham and Judy Burke, were identified by BDN only as local mayors in towns near the Rocky Mountain National Park. BDN omitted mentioning that both of them are well-connected with the lobby for the National Park Service.
Murphy
I don't know if this will enlighten you any, but I can give you a short history of the Quimby involvement in the Katahdin Area.
My version anyway.
After her first major purchase from Irving Timberlands, there has been a land rush in place that involves speculators from all over the world with an accompanying unprecedented forest liquidation on a scale that makes the spruce budworm epidemic seem like a small firewood operation.
Aided by the Baldacci administration, through their "throw money at it" solution used throughout his governorship, the Bureau of public Lands and other preservationist agencies used our money to pay for the lands that she really didn't want or need to further her agenda.
Every parcel she has bought in this area has been logged so hard that a deer would have to pack a lunch to get across it.
All this because RQ is standing by with a fistfull of money that she will use to buy the land AT ANY PRICE.
Roger Ek & Ugenetoo,
Thanks for the feedback. This issue (as is usually the case) seems more complex than I first believed. On one hand there isn't much we can do in the short-term to keep the major land owners from selling to the highest bidder. On the other hand not all National Parks draw as many people as say Great Smokey Mountains National Park, and northerly parks don't do much business in the winter.
I have always thought of the national parks as one of the USA's greatest inventions, but I have so little faith in our federal government now, that I am just not sure it would be better than letting the region become chopped into summer homes and/or closed to the public.
One interesting aspect of Great Smokey Mountains NP stems from language inserted into the deed by the grantor, the state of Tennessee, “no toll or license fee shall ever be imposed…” Perhaps an approach similar to this would be a realistic option, given the power and resources of those in favor of a park, in comparison to those opposed.
Example:
Entrance into Maine Woods NP shall never subject a resident of Maine to any encumbrance, including but not limited to: any fees, taxes, waivers, identification beyond that which is legally required to vote in Maine general elections, surcharges, donations, restrictive access, limited park entry points, or any other measures deemed a hindrance, no matter how slight, by a bi-annual and majority vote of the towns encompassed within the area currently (as of the construction of this instrument) delineated by the, generally agreed upon at this time, Maine county boundaries of Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot, and Aroostook.
Reference:
It really is not complex.
If RQ wants to buy all the land in Maine, it wouldn't be a problem with me.
That's what this country is all about.
But she wants OUR government to tie this property up, fence it in, and allow the enviromaniacs that have infiltrated the NPS to oversee it's administration, while at the same time to drive the hated logging and timber harvesting industry away.
That's a problem in my way of thinking.
You're right, that's definitely a problem. She has no right to bring federal control to the very heart of Maine's forest industry.
The notion of northern Maine "becoming chopped into house lots" is a red herring. See how far Plum Creek got with that.
Cantdog Wed, 08/10/2011 #39: "The notion of northern Maine "becoming chopped into house lots" is a red herring. See how far Plum Creek got with that."
And Plum Creek is not trying to nor does it want to divide its land into house lots. It deliberately planned an area with scattered settlements taking advantage of the kind of landscape that would appeal to the owners, evolving over a long period of time.
Yet the viros went berserk -- they don't want private ownership, they want the land locked up by LURC until the National Park Service can get it.
The whole Greenline scheme they tried to get across 26 million acres copying the Adirondacks and the Columbia Gorge was to prohibit development on private property they want locked up while pretending it is still privately owned -- you get the deed, they get the control.
In the 1990s Audubon publicly worried with much hand wringing about an "outside the park mentality" where people would be able to build and live. This is why they were demanding Greenline land use prohibitions along with the National Park acquisition agenda. They want control stifling everything.
Yet Quimby is peddling the notion of a "gateway" claiming that people would prosper for free just by being there as a substitute for a productive economy. What they don't say is that they want to control who is there and for what purpose. The whole scheme is intended for insiders living in a kind of feudalism exploiting vast stretches of scenic wilderness controlled by the government for their own enjoyment while keeping everyone else out.
Ugenetoo Wed, 08/10/2011 #37: "If RQ wants to buy all the land in Maine, it wouldn't be a problem with me. That's what this country is all about. But she wants OUR government to tie this property up, fence it in, and allow the enviromaniacs that have infiltrated the NPS to oversee it's administration, while at the same time to drive the hated logging and timber harvesting industry away."
I don't think that's quite the way you meant to put it. Aside from the problem of Quimby trying to hijack the power of the Federal government to impose her anti-private property wilderness agenda -- which ought to make anyone angry -- it's not the "American way" for an individual to buy up and stifle an entire state even if she were to keep it in her ownership, and would be a big problem throwing so much money around for such a destructive purpose. Feudalism and a feudalist mentality isn't the "American way".
But no one has the money to buy a state, and without government coercion could not force people to sell. She has a legal right to buy property and do stupid things with it, but the damage she could do with such a mentality would be limited without government coercion backing it.
The Nature Conservancy was caught several decades ago buying up a large area on the eastern shore of Maryland one parcel at a time, hiding behind front groups so people wouldn't catch on that their communities were being destroyed. It caused a lot of resentment and properly so.
The Maine Coast Heritage Trust has been accumulating land on the downeast coast after it failed in an attempt to get the National Park Service to take over much of the county (one of the other NPCA priority targets for National Parks in Maine). Their intentions are frightening because like Quimby they have an arrogant agenda and mentality, a lot of money, and insider connections to the National Park Service.
But even if they were to keep the land they are doing a lot of damage in destroying the economic base and the ability to maintain infrastructure by suppressing the population base. And they were caught in an application for LMF subsidies trashing private "inholdings" because, like the National Park Service, they don't want them.
The arrogance of these preservationists trying to dictate where humans can and cannot live go far beyond any legitimate land conservation and is quite frightening.
I've thought about your reply, and I have to stand by my original feelings that she can buy anything she wants if there is a willing seller.
That's the American way.
Once the government gets involved though, that's a whole new ballgame.
She has every right to purchase it providing that she continues to pay the property taxes on it and never asks for special tax breaks.
She does not have the right to decide for herself when or if to take it out of the tax base.
WmJas, this raises a very important question. The penalty for removing land from tree-growth status is substantial in order to protect the local and state tax base. If RQ is trying to "donate" this land to the feds, how does that work out for Maine? Will she pay the penalty to the state of Maine?
I am curious to know more about this.
After change of ownership it is up to the new owner to comply with the tree growth requirements. Since the Federal government does not pay taxes and is not subject to state laws, the state would would be stuck. This is only one example of why no one has a "right" to put a portion of the state under Federal control. It is not just a change of ownership from one owner to another; it is a change in the form of government and a unilateral change in the territory of a state, which includes Federal control imposed outside the area of the land lost and a threat of much more. Roxanne Quimby has no 'right' to do that.
The fact that the National Park Service does not pay property taxes and pays almost nothing "in lieu of taxes" is the least of it. Even if Quimby were to pay the state some amount of money it would mean her buying public policy and government control imposed in accordance with her wishes. That is not the purpose of government; it is not for sale, and certainly not to a power-seeker like Quimby who as a 60s counter-culture socialist wants to fundamentally change the nature and purpose of government and impose it on the rest of us. She has no right to do that by any means.
Ugenetoo Thu, 08/11/2011 #42: "I've thought about your reply, and I have to stand by my original feelings that she can buy anything she wants if there is a willing seller.
That's the American way."
You had originally written "If RQ wants to buy all the land in Maine, it wouldn't be a problem with me. That's what this country is all about."
Buying an entire state is not what the "country is about" and would be a "problem". Recognizing that does not mean that she doesn't have a legal right to buy what she wants from willing sellers whether anyone else likes it or not. People have the right under law to do a lot of things that may very well cause "problems" for others and which do not represent the "American way".
There is a distinction between what is good and what is legal. Freedom of choice under that law does not guarantee that the best choices will always be made, especially by those with an alien mentality to begin with.
Once the government gets involved though, that's a whole new ballgame.
That makes it much worse, crossing the line of legality and of what should be legal, and her government involvement delimits what she in fact has a "right" to do.
Quimby is trying to exploit what she claims is a "right" to impose Federal control in the name of "property rights", but which is not her right under property rights or anything else, in order to destroy property rights (and a lot more). She acknowledges that much. She is very confused about property rights but doesn't care because she is a power seeker who wants to impose dictatorial control under the National Park Service.
Quimby is not alone in that. The Nature Conservancy, the Trust for Public Land, and other such organizations have for a long time been been flipping land to the Federal government (in authorized areas), exploiting the real estate market in order to destroy it and private property rights.
Now it seems Interior Secretary Salazar will be in Maine on August 18th, the same day Quimby is planning another meeting in Medway. Will the people in Medway fall for this show of DC influence?
Salazar is coming to collaborate with the NPS fifth column and negotiate terms of surrender before the occupation they want.
Salazar has been to Maine before, meeting with the viros about their plans. As Brownie Carson, head of the National Resources Council of Maine, put it in an email to one of his cronies in the Interior Department two years ago when Baldacci was still governor and the viros leaders in the Northern Forest Alliance were on his staff:
"We (NRCM) are working on a fabulous project in Maine, the object of which is to protect 4.5 million acres of Mane's northern forest in the Moosehead Lake-Baxter Park-Allagash Wilderness Waterway region. The governor is engaged and supportive, and there is wide interest in conserving this special area. When Secretary Salazar was here in July for a tour of Acadia, a small group of colleagues (including our board chair) met briefly with him to discuss this northern forest initiative. My understanding is that he was very enthusiastic about it, and suggested that it may be a good fit for the Treasured Landscape program."
The "Treasured Landscape" program is the latest euphemism under Obama for the Federal land grab -- they want to seize other people's treasure. "Protect" means, as always, seize control of for their own purposes.
Bluejay:
I have asked Scott to post my study, if he can find it in the AMG archives. My feasibility study focused on the claimed economic benefits of the park At the time, Jonathan Carter claimed that the park would create over 20,000 jobs. He and the other proponents claimed that the ecotourism connected with the park would essentially make up for the loss of paper company and other revenue.
I looked at several things:
-- The then-current paper company payroll
-- The size of the entire National Park service
-- The draw and economic effect of other national parks (including Acadia, which was at the time 6th in popularity nationally)
-- The employment figures in Aroostook and Piscataquis and Hancock and other counties, together with the change during the off season (Acadia closes during the winter, and is located within one county - easy comparable)
-- The economic income generated by the AMC White Mountain operation.
Disclaimer: the figures were based on 2000 era numbers for paper company revenue. At the time, paper companies generated a 12 million plus payroll PER WEEK!!
I first noted that Carter's claim of 20 K jobs was completely stupid, at least in terms of direct employment. It approximated the size of the entire National Park Service, nationwide, full and part time.
I then looked at our "comparable", Acadia. Acadia is a VERY popular park. That is due to the many amenities created to entertain and service people, back before such things were eschewed by rabid greenies. It has the carriage trails, the Jordan Pond house, and a road up Cadillac Mountain. It has the iron ladders up Champlain. Under current doctrine, such items would NOT be permitted in a NEW national park.
The numbers have changed quite a bit. The net revenue from White Mountain operations was 4.5 million, total. The net revenue from EVERYTHING up and down the eastern seaboard is about 12 million dollars in 2010. That includes "publications".
The annual PAYROLL for Maine's paper industry (not bear hunting in the woods, or lumber, or unrelated biomass) is $459 million. http://www.pulpandpaper.org/
Figure only 10 percent is from the proposed park area -- that's 45 million. That's after a decade of "rural cleansing".
To get a real "apples and apples", you'd need figures on what income is generated just in NH from the AMC operations -- but the 12 mil from GA to ME is not a bad figure.
To get a real flavor of how many jobs are created from a VERY successful national park, you compare the seasonal fluctuation in jobs in Hancock county, and compare the seasonal fluctuation in another coastal county that has no park -- like Lincoln or Waldo.
I concluded that the "Big Pahk" would likely eliminate some 7-9000 full time jobs with benefits and replace them with about a hundred full time jobs and a couple hundred part time seasonal jobs. It would also take the tax revenue now generated by woodland and eliminate it. Such revenue as would be generated by the park itself would be controlled in DC, not Augusta.
Finally, given the "roadless / no amenities" approach favored by parks these days. the "Big Pahk" would be MUCH LESS SUCCESSFUL than Acadia. Moreover, it likely would not be an addition to Acadia. It would "steal" at least some income from Baxter Park, and the income from Baxter is controlled by us in Augusta.
Bottom line -- in 2000, the Big Park was an unmitigated disaster economically. Today, it is a closer call. It is exchanging 3.8 million a month in PAYROLL alone, for 12 million a YEAR in total revenue. Previously it was 12 million a WEEK in payroll vs 4-5 million total budget.
Even with the red-green squeeze, the paper companies are a wildly better deal than the ecotourism from the proposed Big Pahk. When one factors in lost bear hunting (6 mil a year for the state - a very large part of which comes from up north) and the lost existing revenue from ecotourism (paper co land is more accessible and usable than National Park land), the park would still be an economic disaster for Maine.
PS: You can get the labor force numbers by county here for Hancock ; and here for Lincoln
Hancock has a fluctuation of 3K jobs july to December. Lincoln -- 2k, but no national park. If you assume EVERY SINGLE JOB in the different seasonal fluctuation comes from Acadia, that is 1K seasonal jobs from the 9th most popular national park in the USA, which possesses amenities, access, roads and other attractions that Northwoods wouldn't.
Final observation: there is an argument that the difference in seasonal fluctuation is based on relative population size, and Acadia doesn't, net, create even a single job. The total labor force in Hancock County in December 2010 was 28,600. Total for Lincoln was 17, 312. In short, you'd expect a larger Hancock fluctuation in terms of raw numbers, because Hancock's population is larger (by a lot) than Lincoln's. In terms of percentage of labor force, the difference in fluctuation is almost nothing. One is a 12% fluctuation, and the other is 11%. the discerning statisticians will also note that the unemployment rate in Acadia enriched Hancock is higher than in Lincoln.
Darned right. It seems Nick Sambides' Aug 10 headline LePage won’t take sides on Quimby’s national park plan is inaccurate afterall. Shame on him.
BDN is doing everything it can to promote and try to create credibility for Quimby. There have been at a dozen of these advocacy articles, mostly by Sambide's, but also by Miller and Young, in about the last month. BDN used to be a decent newspaper. Since the progressives took it over it has become propaganda for their political activism, and the reporting on all kinds of topics has become increasingly sloppy. BDN is no longer a credible source of news.
BDN is doing everything it can to promote and try to create credibility for Quimby. There have been at a dozen of these advocacy articles, mostly by Sambide's, but also by Miller and Young, in about the last month. BDN used to be a decent newspaper. Since the progressives took it over it has become propaganda for their political activism, and the reporting on all kinds of topics has become increasingly sloppy. BDN is no longer a credible source of news.
So, who owns, controls, determines the content and flavor of said newspaper? How about some names and background. Murdoch, Soros? I am thirsty for some expose with a twist....yes.
Nothing that dramatic that I know of. It's family owned, inherited by radical progressive members of the family with less interest in journalism than proselytizing for progressive political causes. The publisher is Richard Warren, who has a penchant for viro causes, has been on the board of trustees of The Nature Conservancy, and hired viro progressives to operate the paper.
I agree. I'd say Warren and his sister, chairwoman of the board, have drunk the kool-aid.
I believe that Governor Lepage was on the right track on this one. I believe that he should, however, kick it up a notch:
-- He should promise to veto any bill to cede sovereignty of this Maine land to the feds;
-- He should point out to every Mainer that the US Constitution protects state land from being "bought up" by the feds without consent of the state;
-- He should point out the breach of trust required for any legislator to vote to cede land to the feds;
-- He should note that the park would likely divert recreation income from Baxter Park (which we control) to Washington (which we do not).
-- He should emphasize that poor economic times are bad times to be giving away state resources to anyone, or taking state land (forever) off the tax rolls;
-- He should tell Ms. Quimby that he would support her efforts to develop her land to a profitable recreational business.
Along with editor Susan Young, and cub reporter Nick Sambides.
This is "Hugo", one our trail sentinels on the ITS 85 between Shin Pond and Matagamon.
He came to town to ride in the Patten pioneer days parade to show his displeasure over the recent anouncement about the Maine Woods National Park.
Handsome devil, ain't he.
And available (if you know anybody.....)
T shirts are available for $17 w/free shipping from;
Christe @ 356-9288
- Login to post comments
The "National Recreation Area" referred to in that article as Quimby saying she wants is no different than a "National Park". The National Park Service has dozens of names for its categories -- such as National Seashores, National Trails, Wild and Scenic Rivers, National Battlefield Parks, etc. -- and runs them all the same top-down way, with the same expansionist, anti-private property rights mentality and subject to the same drive from within and from the pressure groups for preservationism over recreation -- especially eliminating snowmobiles and hunting.
The notorious Cuyahoga National Park where NPS forcibly removed hundreds of families, seizing their homes and businesses with eminent domain, started as a "National Recreation Area". And Quimby's assertion that Acadia is the only National Park north of Shenandoah is not true: NPS has abused people the same way in the northeast for the Appalachian Trail, the Cape Cod National Seashore, the Minuteman National Historic Park and other battlefield parks associated with the revolution and the civil war.
Quimby is wheeling and dealing with all kinds of phony promises she has no authority to make and no intention of keeping in order to con local people. She is well-connected with the sophisticated national lobby for parks and wilderness, including top officials in government. She was herself appointed by Obama to the government-created National Parks Foundation.
There is lot of outside money going into this campaign being used to propagandize and steamroll local people. The progressives at BDN, the Sun Journal and the Portland chain are collaborating them with a campaign of advocacy articles trying to create a bandwagon effect. For every one of these advocacy articles you see there is much more going on behind the scenes both amongst the big shots and in their "community organizing" cajoling and arm twisting one on one.