; Whereas Federal agencies are tasked with protecting and conserving biodiversity in the United States and worldwide through a variety of legal and policy channels; Whereas there is no coordinating policy to maximize the effectiveness of the conservation efforts of the Federal Government and collaboration by the Federal Government with States, local governments, Indian Tribes, private landowners, and other nongovernmental stakeholders; Whereas the United States should play a leading role on the international stage in addressing the biodiversity crisis, yet the United States— (1) is not a party to— (A) the Convention on Biological Diversity, done at Rio de Janeiro June 5, 1992; (B) the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (commonly known as the Convention on Migratory Species ), done at Bonn November 6, 1979; or (C) other relevant international agreements; (2) does not issue a periodic national biodiversity outlook, contrary to most other countries; and (3) does not have a national biodiversity strategy as part of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; and Whereas scientific research highlights essential pathways forward, including— (1) establishing the effective conservation, restoration, and durable protection of not less than 30 percent of an ecologically representative area of the lands, freshwaters, and oceans in the United States and in the world by 2030 by working collaboratively with governments, land owners, fishers, indigenous peoples, communities, and others; (2) restoring or rewilding species, degraded habitats, and ensuring integrity and connectivity of protected areas; (3) retaining and protecting highly intact ecosystems; (4) reducing pesticide use to levels not higher than necessary for ecologically sustainable and safe food production; and (5) addressing the threats posed by invasive species: Now, therefore, be it