Identifying priority science needs for strengthening decision making on public lands
Public lands provide many important resources, values, and uses to the American people. For example, many lands offer abundant recreational opportunities while also conserving habitat for iconic wildlife species and delivering stunning scenic views. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages the largest area of public lands in the United States and is committed to using science to inform their decisions and actions. Because uses on these lands are numerous and varied, decision-making can be complex.
In this series of projects, the USGS, BLM, and other agencies worked together to identify specific needs for data, science, methods, and mitigation actions that can strengthen the science foundation for resource planning and management decisions on public lands. Researchers and resource managers co-developed novel methods and utilized non-traditional data sources, such as environmental impact assessments and litigation documents, to inform and ground this work.
Science in public lands management
BLM is committed to using science-informed decision making at every level and in every program of the agency to increase the science foundation, consistency, transparency, and defensibility of the agency’s decisions (Kitchell and others, 2015).
A key first question is ‘What are the current priority science needs for the agency?’ In essence, what gaps in the science information currently available to BLM planners and managers may be hindering their ability to make effective, scientifically sound resource management decisions?
The overarching goal of the following studies was to work together with BLM to identify priority science needs for the agency using structured, repeatable methods that incorporate multiple lines of evidence. To do this, researchers examined publicly available documents to provide a comprehensive assessment of potential science information needs for managing public lands.
Identifying the types and topics of science information needed to inform decision making on public lands
In this study, researchers identified four types of science information needed for making decisions relevant to public lands: (1) data about resources of concern, (2) scientific studies relevant to understanding potential effects of proposed actions on resources, (3) methods for quantifying those effects, and (4) effective measures for mitigating potential adverse effects on resources.
Researchers used this framework to determine which proposed actions and potentially affected resources were most commonly analyzed in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents completed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Colorado. They also analyzed how frequently analysis sections for different resources included data citations, quantified potential environmental effects of proposed actions on resources, and recommended mitigation actions.
The types of actions most commonly analyzed by BLM related to fluid minerals (e.g., oil and gas development), lands & realty (e.g., rights-of-ways for energy transmission lines), and livestock grazing & range management.
The resources most commonly analyzed by BLM in Colorado included terrestrial wildlife (typically big game species), migratory and other protected birds, vegetation, soils, and archeological & historic resources.
Using public litigation records to identify priority science and data needs for the Bureau of Land Management
The BLM is frequently challenged on its planning and management decisions. In this study, the USGS worked together with the BLM to explore a novel scientific approach to identify potential science needs for the agency through the lens of recent litigation. The interagency team analyzed a subset of recent legal challenges to BLM’s use of science in management decisions. Specifically, they searched publicly available case documents within the Department of Interior (DOI) Office of Hearings and Appeals and federal courts in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico.
Researchers categorized challenges based on the type of proposed action, type of potentially affected resource, and the type of science information that was challenged (data, science, methods, or mitigation actions). They then identified which proposed actions and potentially affected resources needed more science support based on the frequency of challenges, the number of states where similar challenges occurred, whether BLM lost the challenge, and whether the case was sent back to the agency.
Across case documents, they identified proposed oil and gas development and its effects on a variety of resources as a top science need. They also identified science related to proposed mining actions and management of wild horses and burros as priorities. This suggests there may be a need for more data about resources, science relevant to potential impacts, and methods for analyzing potential impacts to support decision making related to oil and gas development, mining, and management of wild horses and burros.
Identifying priority science information needs for managing public lands
In this study, researchers developed a methodology to use multiple data sources (beyond recent litigation) for identifying priority science needs for public land management agencies. They aimed to develop a repeatable method that relies on publicly available documents and can be applied in multiple contexts.
They relied on three core data sources to identify priority science needs: environmental impact assessments conducted for agency decisions, legal challenges to those decisions contained in litigation documents, and protest resolution reports, which respond to public protests to BLM land use plans. Researchers classified topics as primary science needs when (1) the topic was analyzed frequently in agency environmental analyses, (2) the metric of quality/defensibility was low or mitigation measures were frequently included for the topic, and (3) the agency was challenged on its use of science for the topic. They also identified secondary science needs as well as specialized needs for issues that may be newly emerging or longer term.
Core data sources used to identify primary and secondary science information needs included environmental assessments, protest resolution reports, and litigation documents. Supplemental data sources used to identify specialized science information needs included resource management plans, place-based science plans, topical science plans, and environmental impact statements.
When researchers applied this methodology to the BLM in Colorado, they found that vegetation was the topic identified as a primary science need across all four science information categories: data, science, methods, and mitigation measures (see associated figure). Addressing these science needs may require additional research in some circumstances, but existing science can also be compiled, summarized, and synthesized to support management decisions.
Exploring the science and data foundation for federal public lands decisions
In this study, researchers assessed the number, type, and age of documents cited in environmental impact assessments completed by the BLM in Colorado from 2015–2019, to better understand how science and data are currently used in the BLM’s decision making.
Cited science resources included journal articles, books, and agency reports along with published and internal agency datasets, management or legal documents, and websites. Environmental impact analyses analyzing effects of oil and gas development actions included the highest number of citations. Scientists can use the results of this study to identify where additional science products, communication efforts, or technical support may be most needed to strengthen the transparent use of science in decision-making.
Environmental assessments contained an average of 17 citations (range 0–111), with documents analyzing effects of oil and gas development and recreation actions including the highest and lowest mean number of citations (41 and 6, respectively). Scientists can use the results of this study to identify where additional science is needed, or if the science is available, when to work with managers to ensure science is used.
Publicly available documents provide useful and objective data for understanding science priorities and needs
The studies described above developed and applied objective, repeatable methods that rely on publicly available data, namely legal documents and environmental analyses from the BLM, to identify the types and topics of science that public land managers may need most to strengthen the science foundation for their decisions and actions. Researchers were able to objectively assess how and for what issues science information is currently used most often, and where more science may be needed to support decision making on public lands. These methods can be applied across different agencies and geographic areas to understand the science needs of resource managers and support science-informed decision making.
Read more about science related to this project.
Developing structured science syntheses for use in NEPA analyses and decision making in the Bureau of Land Management
Developing a step-by-step process for assessing cumulative effects in the Bureau of Land Management
Understanding the use of habitat models for managing and conserving rare plants on western public lands
Developing searchable annotated bibliographies for resource managers
Developing a toolkit for coproducing actionable science to support public land management
Using public litigation records to identify priority science and data needs for the Bureau of Land Management
Public lands provide many important resources, values, and uses to the American people. For example, many lands offer abundant recreational opportunities while also conserving habitat for iconic wildlife species and delivering stunning scenic views. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages the largest area of public lands in the United States and is committed to using science to inform their decisions and actions. Because uses on these lands are numerous and varied, decision-making can be complex.
In this series of projects, the USGS, BLM, and other agencies worked together to identify specific needs for data, science, methods, and mitigation actions that can strengthen the science foundation for resource planning and management decisions on public lands. Researchers and resource managers co-developed novel methods and utilized non-traditional data sources, such as environmental impact assessments and litigation documents, to inform and ground this work.
Science in public lands management
BLM is committed to using science-informed decision making at every level and in every program of the agency to increase the science foundation, consistency, transparency, and defensibility of the agency’s decisions (Kitchell and others, 2015).
A key first question is ‘What are the current priority science needs for the agency?’ In essence, what gaps in the science information currently available to BLM planners and managers may be hindering their ability to make effective, scientifically sound resource management decisions?
The overarching goal of the following studies was to work together with BLM to identify priority science needs for the agency using structured, repeatable methods that incorporate multiple lines of evidence. To do this, researchers examined publicly available documents to provide a comprehensive assessment of potential science information needs for managing public lands.
Identifying the types and topics of science information needed to inform decision making on public lands
In this study, researchers identified four types of science information needed for making decisions relevant to public lands: (1) data about resources of concern, (2) scientific studies relevant to understanding potential effects of proposed actions on resources, (3) methods for quantifying those effects, and (4) effective measures for mitigating potential adverse effects on resources.
Researchers used this framework to determine which proposed actions and potentially affected resources were most commonly analyzed in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents completed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Colorado. They also analyzed how frequently analysis sections for different resources included data citations, quantified potential environmental effects of proposed actions on resources, and recommended mitigation actions.
The types of actions most commonly analyzed by BLM related to fluid minerals (e.g., oil and gas development), lands & realty (e.g., rights-of-ways for energy transmission lines), and livestock grazing & range management.
The resources most commonly analyzed by BLM in Colorado included terrestrial wildlife (typically big game species), migratory and other protected birds, vegetation, soils, and archeological & historic resources.
Using public litigation records to identify priority science and data needs for the Bureau of Land Management
The BLM is frequently challenged on its planning and management decisions. In this study, the USGS worked together with the BLM to explore a novel scientific approach to identify potential science needs for the agency through the lens of recent litigation. The interagency team analyzed a subset of recent legal challenges to BLM’s use of science in management decisions. Specifically, they searched publicly available case documents within the Department of Interior (DOI) Office of Hearings and Appeals and federal courts in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico.
Researchers categorized challenges based on the type of proposed action, type of potentially affected resource, and the type of science information that was challenged (data, science, methods, or mitigation actions). They then identified which proposed actions and potentially affected resources needed more science support based on the frequency of challenges, the number of states where similar challenges occurred, whether BLM lost the challenge, and whether the case was sent back to the agency.
Across case documents, they identified proposed oil and gas development and its effects on a variety of resources as a top science need. They also identified science related to proposed mining actions and management of wild horses and burros as priorities. This suggests there may be a need for more data about resources, science relevant to potential impacts, and methods for analyzing potential impacts to support decision making related to oil and gas development, mining, and management of wild horses and burros.
Identifying priority science information needs for managing public lands
In this study, researchers developed a methodology to use multiple data sources (beyond recent litigation) for identifying priority science needs for public land management agencies. They aimed to develop a repeatable method that relies on publicly available documents and can be applied in multiple contexts.
They relied on three core data sources to identify priority science needs: environmental impact assessments conducted for agency decisions, legal challenges to those decisions contained in litigation documents, and protest resolution reports, which respond to public protests to BLM land use plans. Researchers classified topics as primary science needs when (1) the topic was analyzed frequently in agency environmental analyses, (2) the metric of quality/defensibility was low or mitigation measures were frequently included for the topic, and (3) the agency was challenged on its use of science for the topic. They also identified secondary science needs as well as specialized needs for issues that may be newly emerging or longer term.
Core data sources used to identify primary and secondary science information needs included environmental assessments, protest resolution reports, and litigation documents. Supplemental data sources used to identify specialized science information needs included resource management plans, place-based science plans, topical science plans, and environmental impact statements.
When researchers applied this methodology to the BLM in Colorado, they found that vegetation was the topic identified as a primary science need across all four science information categories: data, science, methods, and mitigation measures (see associated figure). Addressing these science needs may require additional research in some circumstances, but existing science can also be compiled, summarized, and synthesized to support management decisions.
Exploring the science and data foundation for federal public lands decisions
In this study, researchers assessed the number, type, and age of documents cited in environmental impact assessments completed by the BLM in Colorado from 2015–2019, to better understand how science and data are currently used in the BLM’s decision making.
Cited science resources included journal articles, books, and agency reports along with published and internal agency datasets, management or legal documents, and websites. Environmental impact analyses analyzing effects of oil and gas development actions included the highest number of citations. Scientists can use the results of this study to identify where additional science products, communication efforts, or technical support may be most needed to strengthen the transparent use of science in decision-making.
Environmental assessments contained an average of 17 citations (range 0–111), with documents analyzing effects of oil and gas development and recreation actions including the highest and lowest mean number of citations (41 and 6, respectively). Scientists can use the results of this study to identify where additional science is needed, or if the science is available, when to work with managers to ensure science is used.
Publicly available documents provide useful and objective data for understanding science priorities and needs
The studies described above developed and applied objective, repeatable methods that rely on publicly available data, namely legal documents and environmental analyses from the BLM, to identify the types and topics of science that public land managers may need most to strengthen the science foundation for their decisions and actions. Researchers were able to objectively assess how and for what issues science information is currently used most often, and where more science may be needed to support decision making on public lands. These methods can be applied across different agencies and geographic areas to understand the science needs of resource managers and support science-informed decision making.
Read more about science related to this project.