Ch. 5— Maintaining Biological Diversity Onsite • 125 



national level are collected by government 

 agencies, academic institutions, and research 

 centers. Completeness of the information varies 

 from country to country. Several countries, 

 such as Australia and Sweden, have compiled 

 comprehensive biological surveys of their flora 

 and fauna. Other countries, such as the Soviet 

 Union and China, and some international re- 

 gions, such as North, East, and West Africa, 

 have completed or have made significant prog- 

 ress toward completing surveys of their flora. 

 North America is the only part of the north tem- 

 perate zone that has neither synthesized the 

 data on its plant and animal resources nor cre- 

 ated a national biological database (81). 



In fact, the United States has abundant in- 

 formation on its biota at a regional or broad 

 ecosystem level. But data acquisition is de- 

 signed to serve the specific objectives of vari- 

 ous organizations. As a result, many of the data- 

 bases relevant to biological diversity are widely 

 scattered, are often incompatible, and are in 

 effect inaccessible to numerous potential users. 

 The objective of maintaining biological diver- 

 sity has been only a tangential consideration 

 in most data-collection efforts. However, files 

 on endangered species assembled by the Smith- 

 sonian Institution and the U.S. Fish and Wild- 

 life Service do address an important aspect of 

 species diversity directly. 



The only comprehensive nationwide infor- 

 mation system dealing directly with both spe- 

 cies and ecosystem diversity is the national 

 aggregation of State Natural Heritage Program 

 data. This system is extensively used for deci- 

 sionmaking on acquisition, designation, and 

 management of protected areas. 



The heritage program inventories are contin- 

 ually updated through a system of information 

 gathering and ranking. They begin with a broad 

 information search of secondary sources for 

 rare species and ecosystems. These are then 

 ranked, and further search, including field 

 work, takes place for the rarest ones. The in- 

 ventory is made up of a series of manual and 

 computer files containing the species and eco- 

 system's classification, location, site where it 

 occurs, land ownership of the site, and sites 



located on already protected land. Inventory 

 data are plotted on U.S. Geological Survey maps 

 to analyze which lands are most important to 

 protect and what impacts specific development 

 projects will have on diversity. 



In recent years a great deal of attention has 

 been given to the use of computers for manag- 

 ing biological data. Data management is facili- 

 tated by the flexibility of the hardware and by 

 the many types of software on the market today. 

 For example. Geographic Information Systems 

 (CIS) are being used by the Forest Service and 

 the National Park Service to integrate databases 

 with spatial information. This technique pro- 

 duces overlay maps that have great potential 

 to aid efforts to maintain biological diversity 

 (figure 5-4). At present such overlay maps are 

 used to assess the extent to which ecosystem 

 diversity is being protected by combining de- 

 tails on ecosystem and species distribution with 

 information on boundaries of various types of 

 protected areas. International and nongovern- 

 ment agencies are also finding the technique 

 useful: CIS are a basic tool for GRID, The Na- 

 ture Conservancy (TNG) has recently begun 

 using CIS in its international program, and 

 lUCN's Conservation Monitoring Center plans 

 to acquire a system, once funding is secured 

 (33). 



The data on biological diversity generated at 

 the State level are being aggregated at the na- 

 tional level by TNG. The quality and quantity 

 of information varies from State to State, a few 

 States do not yet have programs, and inventory 

 of species and communities that are not threat- 

 ened is just beginning. In spite of these limita- 

 tions, this is the most comprehensive national 

 database on biological diversity. In many geo- 

 graphic areas, TNC is the only institution col- 

 lecting data on rare, sensitive, or endemic re- 

 sources that may require special management 

 to maintain their integrity as populations. In 

 these areas, the heritage programs help to fill 

 an important gap in biological data needed for 

 the onsite maintenance of biological diversity. 



Selection among such data management tech- 

 nologies as the CIS depends on the financial 

 resources and the objectives of the organiza- 



