In 1992, the Maine DEP abandoned its own 1991 “compromise” lake level regime in favor of one which moved Sebago Lake even farther away from the historic, pre-1987 levels that Maine DEP technical staff and the Maine Bureau of Parks had strongly recommended 24 months earlier. This new Maine DEP plan and its rationale were described in a March 27, 1992 Maine DEP document titled: "Report on Sebago Lake Water Levels." Page 10 of the report states:

"It is obvious that the Park beach [Songo Beach] has lost a significant amount of sand in the past. This loss of sand has exacerbated high water levels on the beach, resulting in less useable beach today than was available historically during July and August. The critical need for lower than average water levels in early summer for the beach conflicts with the need to maintain adequate summer levels throughout the boating season. The current water level plan may or may not stabilize the existing beach. The feasibility of restoring the Park beach through the addition of sand should be evaluated as a partial solution to the problem of maintaining a useable beach during the primary recreation season (July and August), especially during wet years."

In this amazing 1992 document, Maine DEP repeatedly admits violating Maine’s Anti-Degradation Statute -- and states its intent to continue doing so.

Maine DEP admits that by 1992 Songo Beach at Sebago Lake Park had already lost a "significant amount of sand" compared to its pre-1987 condition. Despite this finding, the Maine DEP recommended a plan that it admitted “may or may not” stabilize what was left of Songo Beach in 1992. It did not. What was left of Songo Beach and its wooded, old growth shoreline in 1992 washed away in just a few years.

As a final admission of failure, the Maine DEP report instructs the Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation to investigate trucking in large quantities of sand and dumping it onto Songo Beach to replace the natural sand which had been lost to erosion during the past four years. This recommendation shows a profound lack of understanding by the Maine DEP of the physical laws governing beach erosion and the findings of its own technical staff on this topic. Had the Maine Bureau of Parks engaged in this extremely expensive "beach replenishment" venture, the higher than normal fall water levels imposed by Maine DEP and the physical laws governing beach dynamics would have caused this artificial sand deposit to be quickly eroded away. (See: Memorandum of Jeff Dennis, Maine DEP to Deborah Richard, Maine DEP, May 22, 1990; Letter of Barry S. Timson, Maine geologist, to Stephen M. Kasprzak, Response to Marriott Letter of 1/14/91. January 24, 1991; Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Final EIS, January 1997; Memorandum of Maine State Geologist Robert Marvinney, December 23, 2003).

Records show that by 1992, the Maine DEP ceased to act as a scientific agency and instead assumed the role of mediator in what it viewed solely as a dispute between "competing users" of Sebago Lake and "competing interests" on the lake. This is shown by numerous statements in the March 27, 1992 Maine DEP report:

"The Maine DEP recommended that a Sebago Lake water level management plan be developed that would strike a balance among the competing uses of the lake .... Based on its review, the DEP has concluded that there is no water level plan that will satisfy the perceived needs of all users of Sebago Lake ... No water level plan, by itself, can solve all the conflicts on Sebago Lake or preserve the resources of the lake for future generations ... Neither alternative [to the DEP plan] serves the State's goal of achieving a reasonable accommodation among the competing uses of the lake."

This quote is Count Two of Maine DEP's admission to violating Maine's Anti-Degradation Statute. DEP admits its "plan" will not protect the natural shoreline of Sebago Lake from further destruction, but states that no plan will reach its new goal of "accommodating the competing uses" of Sebago Lake.

This is called "mission creep." What Maine DEP omits here is that its only job in 1992 and today is to enforce the Laws of the State of Maine. Here, Maine DEP states that if enforcing the law will displease some people, then Maine DEP will not enforce the law. That's exactly what Maine DEP has done on Sebago Lake since 1991.

By 1992, Songo Beach at Sebago Lake State Park had lost 70 percent of its beach in just five years. When the Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation documented and protested this destruction, its Director, Mr. Herbert Hartman, found himself viewed by the Maine DEP as just one of many "competing users" of Sebago Lake. This is shown in written statements made by Mr. Hartman in official documents:

"[B]ecause the fall water levels remain similar to those of the late 1980s, we have reservations that the "compromise" will restore the beach to widths traditionally enjoyed, prevent further erosion and tree damage or foster sufficient progradation to restore the lost volume of sand to the beach ." (Letter of Herbert Hartman to the Commission, May 13, 1991).

"Those adversely affected by the raised levels are now asked to accept 'balanced' consideration of uses which were fostered by the unapproved departure from the license." (Letter from Herbert Hartman, Director of the Maine Bureau of Parks, to Dean Marriott, Commissioner of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, April 29, 1992.)

This policy drift/shift by the Maine DEP meant two things for the Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation. First, Maine DEP now considered the Bureau's goal of restoring Songo Beach to its pre-1987 width and condition incompatible with "the State's goal of achieving a reasonable accommodation among the competing uses of the lake." (See: Maine Department of Environmental Protection. Report on Sebago Lake Water Levels. March 27, 1992 at 8.)

Second, the Maine DEP could no longer consider scientific evidence -- even from its own technical staff or sister agencies -- which showed specific water levels were necessary to restore the natural beaches and shoreline of Sebago Lake. At this point, the Maine DEP adopted a strategy of redefining the problem until your solution solves it. By redefining the problem as "achieving a reasonable accommodation among the competing uses of the lake" the Maine DEP found that restoring Songo Beach at Sebago Lake State Park was not compatible with this goal and therefore, could not be accommodated. This position necessitated Maine DEP's suggestion that the Maine Bureau of Parks consider trucking in vast amounts of sand and dumping it onto Songo Beach to replace what had been lost. (See: Maine Department of Environmental Protection. Report on Sebago Lake Water Levels. March 27, 1992 at 10.)

Documentary records show the single interest of the Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation was to restore Songo Beach, a natural sand beach at Sebago Lake State Park, to its historic size and condition.

Because the Maine DEP now considered the Maine Bureau of Parks to be just one "competing user" of Sebago Lake, the Maine DEP classified Sebago Lake itself as just one competing user of Sebago Lake.

In doing so, Maine DEP in 1992 violated Maine's Anti-Degradation Statute, the federal Clean Water Act and the statutory water quality standards of Sebago Lake. And Maine DEP is still doing so at Sebago Lake today.