Council Announces Support for Forestry Referendum

Statement by
Brownie Carson, Executive Director, Natural Resources Council of Maine

Today the Natural Resources Council of Maine is announcing our support for the forestry referendum (Question #2) that will be on the November 7th ballot. As part of our support, we are advocating to exempt from the law all landowners who own fewer than 1,000 acres. This exemption will require an amendment to the referendum after it is enacted. We will propose and press for adoption of such an amendment during next year’s legislative session.

Recent studies have clearly documented that the large landowners and paper corporations are the major cause of overharvesting currently underway in Maine’s woods. We do not believe that small woodlot owners, in general, are cutting their forests at an unsustainable pace. Thus, we believe they should be exempted from this proposed law.

The Council has arrived at this position after several months of analysis and deliberation. We looked at the current condition of logging practices in Maine’s woods. We looked at the record of the Maine State Legislature in providing necessary safeguards for Maine’s forests. We listened to citizens who are concerned about the future of Maine’s forests. And we looked at the language of the referendum.

We solicited the opinions of many outside experts, on both sides of this issue, to explore the impact that the referendum’s passage would have on the health of the forests of Maine. Here is what we found.

First, there continue to be serious problems in Maine’s woods that demand attention. Many of the state’s major landowners are continuing to harvest the woods faster than they are growing back. As documented by the Maine Forest Service in 1998, the large landowners are cutting trees 37 percent faster than they are growing back.

Second, the Legislature has completely failed to adopt any meaningful forestry reforms over the past decade. Repeated documentation of ongoing poor forestry practices has proven that the 1989 Forest Practices Act is insufficient, yet the Legislature has failed to take any meaningful action to create a safety net for Maine’s woods.

And its not for lack of opportunities. Proposals to improve forest practices are introduced during essentially every legislative session, but they are always rejected. No matter how minor the proposal, the forest products industry has lobbied hard to defeat it, and has consistently succeeded. The referendum process was established for situations exactly like this, so citizens can press for policy changes when the normal legislative process has failed.

Finally, we found that the proposed referendum can work in a fashion that will help protect Maine’s forests for timber production jobs, wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunities. Opponents of the referendum have presented apocalyptic scenarios to bolster their position against any additional protections for Maine’s forests.

In envisioning how the referendum would work once enacted into law, it is important to consider the following: 1) the rules to implement the referendum would be developed by a Council appointed by the Governor; 2) these rules would be developed through a public hearing process, providing ample opportunity for input from landowners and all Maine citizens; and 3) the final rules must be approved by the Legislature.

We are confident that this process will yield sensible, workable interpretations of the referendum that would not look anything like the alarmist views currently being articulated by opponents of Question 2. For example, we believe that the process would result in an interpretation, clarification, or legislative amendment allowing landowners to “bank” credits so that they can cut above sustained yield levels some years using credits accumulated during years when they cut below sustained yield levels. The referendum’s drafters, the forest products industry, academic experts, and independent foresters all are on record in support of “banking,” and thus it is inconceivable to us that banking would not be allowed.

The wording of this referendum may not be perfect, but no law ever is - not even the United States Constitution, which has been amended 26 times. Lawmaking is a dynamic process, involving repeated efforts to amend, modify, and improve the rules governing our society. That is the context within which the referendum should be viewed.

We are convinced that serious problems persist in Maine’s woods. We know that the Legislature has failed to take any meaningful action in the last decade to address these problems. Thus, we have concluded that adoption of Question 2 is necessary. With the exemption that we have proposed for landowners owning fewer than 1,000 acres, and with the process in place to make it work, this referendum will make a positive contribution to the protection of Maine’s forests.

We encourage all voters to go to the polls on November 7th and vote "Yes" on Question 2, the forestry referendum.