If you look at a map of the National Park System, you'll find a glaring omission in the northeastern United States. There is no large expanse of wilderness protected by a national park. Proponents of a "Maine North Woods National Park and Preserve" want to change that.
In a mission that's been ongoing for a handful of years, proponents behind the movement would like to see such a national park created in time for the National Park Service's centennial in 2016. The proposal calls for a park of 3.2 million acres, larger than Yellowstone National Park, in northern Maine. Along with protecting the landscape and the wildlife that resides there, those backing the park say it would stimulate and nurture the local economy.
The following video takes a look at both the landscape and the threats to it if the park proposal fails.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
I have very mixed feelings about the Maine Woods National Park. Having been born and grown up in Maine, and spent much of my life here, I would love to see our north woods preserved. But having spent a number of years in Colorado, I have also seen how the national parks bring more development and roads, and much more use. I have also seen the national parks being poorly managed, and the pressure for roads and trails leading to serious degredation of habitat. Our own Baxter State Park in Maine is much better managed for it's wilderness attributes than the national parks are, and I'd prefer to see an expansion of Baxter State Park over a national park. But, given the lack of money in Maine, and also the lack of political will, perhaps a national park is the best that we can do. In any case, doing nothing is the worst option. Plum Creek has already planned to massively develop their holdings, and other REITs can not be far behind.
I strongly believe that a national forest would be more user friendly than a park
I Have travelled and camped accross the US for the past 50 years ( I am 85) and find the national forest much more flexible and less restrictive than national parks.
More friendly to local residents
Less sophisticated structures
Closer to nature
possibly more economical to operote
The narrator says:
"If you're looking for wilderness areas anywhere near the northeast...you're out of luck; there aren't any."
What? Baxter State Park doesn't count? I'm not saying the National Park is a bad idea, but it's quite misleading to imply that only within the NPS do you find wilderness.
I live in Maine, where you can buy a 4BR home in downtown Millinocket for $39K. I don't see anything happening in Maine that will improve the financial prospects for the owners of that 4BR property. Are the paper companies going to save northern Maine? The shoe companies? Agriculture? Hardly. A new NP would sew the North Woods with the kind of sustainable economic activity that makes Maine viable for Mainers.
Good point, Kirby, and then there's that other place. What do they call it? Oh yeah, Adirondack State Park.
Kurt,
Oh, you mean the real New York? Yeah, I've heard of that!
"Large" is relative. Although Baxter State Park would it its centerpiece, the proposed NWNP would be considerably much larger. My understanding is that it would be a mixed Park and Preserve to keep some uses open. The area is going to get some development anyways, so better to have it managed by the NPS than by real estate developers. I just traveled to the area, here is a quick report about my trip to the Maine North Woods. I should have images of the area maybe next week and will post a direct link.
Tuan.
National Parks images
Tuan,
Thanks for the link to your report. I'm trying to find a way to justify a trip there, but until I do I'll read as much as I can. You're right that the proposed park would contain a mixture of uses, including hunting, as I understand it. Sounds like under the proposal being pushed the park would be managed much like any other "park and preserve."
I look forward to seeing your images.