Earlier this month, Maine lawmakers voted down a bill proposed by governor Paul LePage that would increase the amount of logging undertaken on state lands in order to fund an increase in a popular energy efficiency subsidy program.  This bill echoes similar proposals in many western states to defederalize national forests so that states can open them up to more economic activity and fund various state initiatives.  However, withdrawing deposits from the hard-won account that is public forests sets a dangerous precedent for future leaders.

In Maine, it’s not the amount of increase that is at issue.  Though the 28% increase thrown around by media sources seems significant, in reality the difference is around 15 acres a year in additional cuts, a tiny amount compared to the 400,000 acres of public reserved lands that are subject to the bill.  Rather, the main problem with this bill is the precedent it sets in political arenas, especially the budget process and forest management planning.

Historically, money collected from logging these forests went directly to forest management: forest restoration and maintenance, trail and boundary maintenance, etc.  There is no legal obligation that this must hold true, but it is nevertheless a tradition that many lawmakers are loathe to break.  Funding an energy efficiency initiative is admirable, but it sets the precedent of using forest resources to fund non-forest initiatives, as well as one of simply cutting more lumber to fund pet projects.  In addition, as often happens, the money used to increase the energy efficiency initiative might well just be used to replace funding that finds itself in another category.  Politicians are not known for honest and transparent budget planning.

Another issue is that these forests are multi-use areas that take into account recreational and wildlife use as well as timber harvest.  These forests have historically been managed to produce old-growth forests that look like the wilderness people think of when they think of Maine.  This also tends to be the type of forest that is most useful to wildlife and recreational users in this region.  More logging could shift the focus inordinately toward the timber industry without offering any advantages for other users.