Mainers are prone to holy wars, especially when it comes to their natural resources. We've fought battles about the Allagash Wilderness Waterway, about forest practices, about dams and wetlands and how to kill bears.

All of these battles share one defining characteristic: The absolutely certainty and sense of righteousness held by opposing sides in the conflict. That certainty and righteousness tend to prolong the crisis and drive up legal fees, while the public gets whipsawed between exaggerated claims of ruin on one side and Nirvana on the other.

Such has been the case with the proposal by real estate trust Plum Creek to develop a large part of its holdings in the Moosehead Lake region.

That plan, first made in 2005, is the largest development proposal in the state's history. Over the last three years, it has undergone an unprecedented degree of scrutiny by staff and commissioners of Maine's Land Use Regulation Commission, or LURC, by conservation group officials and by the public.

HOLY WAR LINES ARE DRAWN

During those three years since it was submitted, the plan has become the focus of a holy war whose proponents on one side promote the development as the last, best chance for economic renewal in the depressed Moosehead Lake towns, or on the other side as the ruination of one of Maine's remaining pristine wilderness parcels.

It became Donald Trump vs. Thoreau.

In truth, it was neither.

The majority of jobs promised by Plum Creek's development were not likely to replace or generate the same kind of income from millworker and forestry jobs of an earlier generation. That economy is rapidly disappearing from Maine.

Nor was the development likely to bring wholesale ruin to a part of the state's wilderness playground. Approximately 400,000 acres have been set aside for permanent conservation in Plum Creek's plan, a part of the proposal that was developed in concert with the Appalachian Mountain Club, the Forest Society of Maine and the Nature Conservancy.

And even though some environmental groups howled in objection to the proposed resort and subdivisions in Lily Bay, that part of Moosehead cannot remotely be called a real wilderness. While it boasts many outstanding natural features, as well as important wildlife populations, there's a state park in Lily Bay that's often filled with campers and a variety of homes already built there.

PLUM CREEK GETS ITS ANSWER

This week, LURC commissioners approved Plum Creek's proposal with the provision that changes have to be made. The commissioners left largely intact the plan's most substantial and controversial aspects, to develop 975 house lots and a resort at Lily Bay.

Plum Creek said it was "pleased" to have gotten the qualified go-ahead from LURC and will review the state's demands and respond by Oct. 14. The company must agree to the state's demands or the approval will not be finalized.

Economic development proponents in Moosehead were likewise satisfied. The groups that helped Plum Creek develop the conservation plan announced that they were content with the review and looked forward to the preservation of important blocs of forestland once the deal is consummated.

And the environmental groups that object to much of the development objected, accusing commissioners and LURC staff of not having listened to the public.

We understand that those who asked LURC not to approve the substance of Plum Creek's plan do not feel that their entreaties were heard. Yet it is also possible that the LURC staff and commissioners heard those pleas, but decided that both the law and their judgment led them to a different conclusion.

DEVELOPMENT, CONSERVATION BALANCE

After more than three years of study and public input, we are largely satisfied that LURC has reached the appropriate conclusion. Its job, by law, is to strike "a publicly beneficial balance between appropriate development and long-term conservation."

That's not an easy balance to strike and by its very nature, such a balance entails compromise on both sides.

We believe the Plum Creek development will bring at least some beneficial economic activity to the region, although that activity is unlikely to be the panacea for the region's economic travails as it transforms from Maine's old economy of natural resource exploitation to a less consumptive, more tourist-based economy.

On the other side, the Plum Creek development is now balanced by conservation of a large swath of important working forest that holds significant recreational, ecological and economic value for the state.

We have some reservations about the process and the outcome of this proposal. We're troubled by the fact that conservation groups are paying Plum Creek $35 million for conservation land.

Normally, when LURC considers the balance between development and conservation in a project, the developer has donated conserved land offered as mitigation for development.

Furthermore, there will most assuredly be lawsuits as a result of this decision.

So the Plum Creek Holy War is likely to continue, which will be a sad waste of energy and resources.

In the end, it would have been much better for the state and advocates of conserving Moosehead's landscape to have come up with a comprehensive economic development plan for the region's residents before Plum Creek came along.

But they didn't -- and instead, the latest in Maine's holy wars was joined once Plum Creek unveiled its massive proposal. So while Moosehead's residents will likely benefit from Plum Creek's plans, that benefit may be a long and bloody time coming.