资源环境科技发展态势分析平台

Overall, it is important that the Conservation and Stewardship Atlas not “reinvent the wheel” in terms of assembling a new conservation database. Many relevant datasets already exist; the Atlas may provide an opportunity to supplement and improve these datasets, but it should not duplicate ongoing efforts. For example, the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) provides a comprehensive geolocated inventory of protected lands. However, it could be enhanced in various ways to provide additional information about those lands. PAD-US also has some missing information; the Atlas should look first to fill those missing gaps. In addition, the Atlas could serve to improve the information we have about private conservation lands, a clear gap in existing databases.

We feel that a clear set of goals and objectives for the Atlas is needed. Acquiring usable data for program implementation and verification of impact is always valuable, but clarity in the goals and objectives of those programs is an essential first step. This is especially true for measures that focus on environmental justice, which though highlighted as an important consideration, is not well described in terms of the desired outcome. In reviewing the America the Beautiful strategy, we note that greater clarity around what the conservation goals are (e.g., equity, carbon storage, habitat provisioning, biodiversity, recreational access, and so forth) would lead to greater clarity in data needs.

The Atlas could provide the opportunity to shed light on activities beyond land protection, but we urge caution as measuring and monitoring private land stewardship on an ongoing basis is difficult, costly, and likely to be fraught with misunderstandings. We feel strongly that anything reported in a Conservation and Stewardship Atlas be comprehensive and accurate, and that the Atlas not “cherry-pick” success stories.

Finally, there is the potential for the Atlas to become siloed within DOI/USGS rather than a collaborative effort across agencies that already acquire meaningful data (USDA, EPA) and non-governmental organizations and scientists. We encourage a broader approach, one that focuses on inclusivity. This will take time to develop but is likely to prove more efficient in development and more useful to the stakeholders.