Only a remarkable government report can be invoked to support and oppose a major policy initiative, at the same time. Such is the power of the Brookings Institution and its magnum opus, “Charting Maine’s Future.”

Some critics of the proposed merger of Maine’s natural resource agencies – Agriculture, Conservation, Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and Marine Resources – used Brookings’ recommendation to protect Maine’s “quality of place” to oppose the action.

Fair enough. The woods and waters, field and farms of Maine are important to our collective character and constituency. Without the glory of our landscape – and the people entrusted to monitor and protect it – Maine would lose its natural luster.

But opposing this merger flies against Brookings other key recommendation – relieve Maine’s crushing tax burden by reducing how much we pay for our state and local government. The recommendations here involve two ideas: efficiency and streamlining.

Again, fair enough. The idea that Maine’s government is overgrown has found traction in Augusta, through vigorous endorsement of the Brookings-originated independent streamlining commission, and the consolidation bonanza pushed by Gov. John Baldacci.

Unfortunately, for bureaucrats and the Brookings disciples, this conflict regarding this massive agency merger only underscores the report’s influence, and key flaw. It tells Maine what it should do, but gives no recommendations on which one, when, or where.

This is for Maine to figure out. But as long as opponents and proponents of certain policies wield the same cudgel – Brookings – to make their point, its only lasting hallmark will be a few political bruises and a permanent place on the shelf.

If, as a state, we cannot figure out which way to utilize an amazing blueprint for our future, then perhaps we don’t deserve to realize it.

The fact is, now some 17 months after the Brookings report was released, debate over its meaning should cease. It was never meant as the roadmap for Maine, but rather only its compass. Go west, young state. Go north, go south, or go east, for that matter.

Go any which way, as long as it’s toward the future.

Maine’s natural resources merger has serious merit. New Hampshire, for example, has marine resources under its fish and game division. Rhode Island has one agency for all, under the title “Department of Environmental Management.”

These are the types of grounded comparisons that should be made when evaluating whether this merger is right for Maine, not whether it jives with some report.

In other words, don’t ask Brookings. Salvation may lie within, but the answers don’t.