Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39607481›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2025

Identifying Priority Science Information Needs for Managing Public Lands.

Sarah K Carter, Travis S Haby, Ella M Samuel, Alison C Foster, Jennifer K Meineke, Laine E McCall, Malia K Burton, Christopher T Domschke, Leigh D Espy, Megan A Gilbert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Sarah K CarterU.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA. skcarter@usgs.gov.
Travis S HabyBureau of Land Management, National Operations Center, Denver, CO, USA.
Ella M SamuelU.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Alison C FosterU.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Jennifer K MeinekeU.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Laine E McCallContractor with the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Malia K BurtonBureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, Lakewood, CO, USA.
Christopher T DomschkeBureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, Lakewood, CO, USA.
Leigh D EspyBureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, Lakewood, CO, USA.
Megan A GilbertBureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, Lakewood, CO, USA.

Funding

Bureau of Land Management Interagency agreements L16PG00147 and L21PG00092
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public lands worldwide provide diverse resources, uses, and values, ranging from wilderness to extractive uses. Decision-making on public lands is complex as a result and is required by law to be informed by science. However, public land managers may not always have the science they need. We developed a methodology for identifying priority science needs for public land management agencies. We relied on two core data sources: environmental effects analyses conducted for agency decisions and legal challenges to those decisions. We considered needs in four categories: data, science, methods, and mitigation measures. We classified topics as primary science needs when (1) the topic was analyzed frequently in agency environmental analyses, (2) our 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. We applied our methodology to the Bureau of Land Management-the largest public land manager in the United States-in Colorado, a state with abundant and diverse public lands. Primary identified needs were data on vegetation; science about effects of oil and gas development and livestock grazing on multiple resources, including terrestrial wildlife; methods for analyzing environmental effects for many topics; and mitigation measures for protecting vegetation, soils, water quality, and archaeological and historic resources. Science needs often reflect needs for facilitating and supporting the use of existing science in agency decision-making. Our method can be applied across agencies, geographies, and timeframes to help strengthen science use in public lands decision-making.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesColoradoDecision MakingUnited StatesBureau of Land ManagementCumulative effectsEnvironmental effects analysesLitigationMitigationNational Environmental Policy Act

Identifiers

PMID39607481
PMCPMC11861505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.