I understand your worries.
The term "conservation" was meant to address not only to the physical conservation but also to all the practice related to the effective management of the Cultural Heritage assets. As stated in the subtitle:
Proposed Q&A site for conservators, scientists, art-historians,
archaeologists and any professional figure linked to the conservation
and management of Cultural Heritage.
If this is accepted as the definition I don't think actually is too narrow. If you look at the number of fields and professional figures that we are trying to involve we are including:
- art historians
- conservation scientists (of Cultural Heritage objects)
- architect and urban planner
That's already quite a variety of professional figures! There are already some questions closed as off-topic because people don't understand for instance that it's an archaeology question. Adding more fields would make moderation too complex. Earth Science and Environmental Science are indeed linked but they are not part of the same community.
The idea is to link professional figures and passionate experts that work (directly or indirectly) on Cultural Heritage objects and their issues . Because working on Cultural Heritage objects implies a specific knowledge of the object and deontology.
I agree that we could change the title to Conservation and management of Cultural Heritage. Even though I think it's a little too verbose.