Comment on functional landscape connectivity for a select few: Linkages do not consistently predict wildlife movement or occupancy. Autumn R. Iverson, David Waetjen, Fraser Shilling

Published Article

Global

Publication date: January 1, 2025

File format: URL

View resource

Ecological connectivity is essential for biodiversity conservation, yet the best strategy—protecting linkages or enhancing landscape permeability—depends on species, goals and context. Responding to Iverson et al., the authors argue that linkage plans still provide critical guidance for prioritizing areas for protection and management. They emphasize that connectivity models remain effective when validation methods align with model objectives and assumptions. Misaligned validation can lead to misleading conclusions. The paper outlines best practices for connectivity model validation, including careful consideration of data types, expectations and landscape context, to strengthen the science and application of connectivity planning.

Subject Tags

  • Conservation Planning
  • Large scale protection
  • Wildlife

Abstract

Ecological connectivity is increasingly acknowledged as crucial for biodiversity conservation. Iverson et al. suggest that increasing stewardship to ensure permeability is a better approach than protecting linkages between protected areas. We argue that the optimal approach depends on the landscape context, conservation goals and species involved and suggest that linkage plans can prioritize specific places for protection and improved management. However, when using connectivity models as predictive tools, model validation is vital. We commend Iverson et al. for assessing whether modeled linkages were important predictors of species presence. We disagree, though, with the authors’ conclusion that their findings challenge the theory and practice of modeling linkages and explain that the reason may be the misalignment of the validation assumptions with model objectives. We offer our perspective on best practices for conducting validation studies and note factors to consider with respect to data used for model validation and model expectations.

Citation

Iverson, A. R., Waetjen, D., & Shilling, F. (2024). Functional landscape connectivity for a select few: Linkages do not consistently predict wildlife movement or occupancy. Landscape and Urban Planning, 243, 104953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105217

TNC Authors

  • Melissa Clark
    Director of Resilience Science
    The Nature Conservancy
    Email: melissa_clark@tnc.org

  • Kimberly R. Hall
    Climate Change Ecologist
    The Nature Conservancy
    Email: kimberly.hall@tnc.org

  • Aaron Jones
    Spatial Data Scientist, New Mexico
    The Nature Conservancy
    Email: ajones@tnc.org

  • Erin E. Poor
    Landscape Ecologist
    The Nature Conservancy

TNC Authors

  • Carrie Schloss
    Lead Climate Scientist, California
    The Nature Conservancy
    Email: cschloss@tnc.org

  • Trish Smith
    Senior Ecologist, California
    The Nature Conservancy
    Email: trish_smith@tnc.org