FAQ

My staff or board still isn’t convinced.

Here are the benefits of remote monitoring:

  • Monitors report feeling more satisfied using remote imagery in place of in-person monitoring, as shown in the table below.

  • While on an in-person visit, monitors report they are often only able to see a portion of the property while remote imagery gives them a view of the entire property. In fact, remote imagery enables monitors to identify changes to the property they would not have otherwise been able to see from the ground.

  • Another major benefit of remote monitoring is the reduction of risks to staff who may encounter various hazards in the field, such as ticks, snakes or other wild animals, storm damage, steep slopes, unauthorized third-party activities (e.g., marijuana growing operations) and altercations with trespassers.

  • Land trusts have found a number of other uses for remote imagery, including:

    • Acquisition preparation

    • Baseline documentation

    • Violation research and resolution

    • Ecological monitoring

    • Restoration

    • Management plans

    • Information for grant applications

  • The technology can also be used for larger organizational goals related to:

    • Climate change impacts

    • Carbon sequestration

    • Achieving 30X30 initiative goals

Conservation defense

While there are many benefits to remote monitoring, before developing a remote monitoring program, a land trust needs to weigh not only the benefits but also the drawbacks of this type of stewardship. It is essential to conduct a thoughtful property-specific analysis to determine whether remote monitoring is appropriate for a property or a portion thereof.

View practical pointer
Satisfaction rating of remote versus in-person monitoring
Remote
In-person
Very satisfied
53%
24%
Somewhat satisfied
38%
68%
Somewhat dissatisfied
9%
8%

I have more questions.

Do you have a question not answered here? We can help.

Connect with us