I served as chairman of the steering committee of the Island Plan, an initiative funded by the six Island towns and adopted by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission.

The development and growth chapter (Section 2.1) tried to sound the alert that not all open space is protected land, even if we happen to derive benefits from it at the moment. It reads:

“Each year, about 600 additional acres of land are developed and 150 acres are protected as open space. If this trend continues, about 80 per cent of the available land — 18,000 acres of woods or fields that we now take for granted as part of the Island’s open space – would end up being developed . . . The future of the Island depends on what happens to the land that is presently available.”

A recent update of the plan’s statistics strongly reinforced this urgency. Even with our land bank funded at the current two per cent transfer fee on most real estate transactions, the projected loss of open space translates into thousands more houses, and a near-doubling of the population.

Can we sustain that sort of future of the Island?

I am therefore disappointed by statements from leadership and citizens on town meeting floor to the effect that we’ve done enough land protection and must steer resources elsewhere. This narrative doesn’t fit with the facts. It invites self-destructive behavior and is not a defensible position if we claim to care about this place and what sets it apart.

Clean water, farmland and wildlife habitat depend on much, much more — not less — land protection. Strengthening and supporting the work of our land bank, not cannibalizing it, is what is needed to fend off the predicted 80 per cent loss.

Please let the community conversation be grounded in a strong factual foundation. One fact is clear: We live on an Island. By definition, Islands have limits. Save what’s left!

James Athearn

Edgartown

The writer is chairman of the Vineyard Conservation Society.