Toward Best Practices for Developing Regional Connectivity Maps

Paul Beier, Wayne Spencer, Robert F. Baldwin, Brad H. Mcrae

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

108 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To conserve ecological connectivity (the ability to support animal movement, gene flow, range shifts, and other ecological and evolutionary processes that require large areas), conservation professionals need coarse-grained maps to serve as decision-support tools or vision statements and fine-grained maps to prescribe site-specific interventions. To date, research has focused primarily on fine-grained maps (linkage designs) covering small areas. In contrast, we devised 7 steps to coarsely map dozens to hundreds of linkages over a large area, such as a nation, province, or ecoregion. We provide recommendations on how to perform each step on the basis of our experiences with 6 projects: California Missing Linkages (2001), Arizona Wildlife Linkage Assessment (2006), California Essential Habitat Connectivity (2010), Two Countries, One Forest (northeastern United States and southeastern Canada) (2010), Washington State Connected Landscapes (2010), and the Bhutan Biological Corridor Complex (2010). The 2 most difficult steps are mapping natural landscape blocks (areas whose conservation value derives from the species and ecological processes within them) and determining which pairs of blocks can feasibly be connected in a way that promotes conservation. Decision rules for mapping natural landscape blocks and determining which pairs of blocks to connect must reflect not only technical criteria, but also the values and priorities of stakeholders. We recommend blocks be mapped on the basis of a combination of naturalness, protection status, linear barriers, and habitat quality for selected species. We describe manual and automated procedures to identify currently functioning or restorable linkages. Once pairs of blocks have been identified, linkage polygons can be mapped by least-cost modeling, other approaches from graph theory, or individual-based movement models. The approaches we outline make assumptions explicit, have outputs that can be improved as underlying data are improved, and help implementers focus strictly on ecological connectivity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)879-892
Number of pages14
JournalConservation Biology
Volume25
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2011

Fingerprint

linkage (genetics)
connectivity
protected area
conservation areas
naturalness
biological corridors
ecoregion
Bhutan
polygon
habitat quality
Northeastern United States
gene flow
ecoregions
habitats
stakeholder
stakeholders
chromosome mapping
wildlife
Canada
animal

Keywords

  • Conectividad
  • Conexiones de vida silvestre
  • Connectivity
  • Conservation planning
  • Cooperativas de conservación del paisaje
  • Corridors
  • Especies focales
  • Focal species
  • Landscape conservation cooperatives
  • Planificación de la conservación
  • Wildlife linkages

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Ecology

Cite this

Toward Best Practices for Developing Regional Connectivity Maps. / Beier, Paul; Spencer, Wayne; Baldwin, Robert F.; Mcrae, Brad H.

In: Conservation Biology, Vol. 25, No. 5, 10.2011, p. 879-892.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Beier, Paul ; Spencer, Wayne ; Baldwin, Robert F. ; Mcrae, Brad H. / Toward Best Practices for Developing Regional Connectivity Maps. In: Conservation Biology. 2011 ; Vol. 25, No. 5. pp. 879-892.
@article{1a7cc9bd1f3140c1acbe372e3d501742,
title = "Toward Best Practices for Developing Regional Connectivity Maps",
abstract = "To conserve ecological connectivity (the ability to support animal movement, gene flow, range shifts, and other ecological and evolutionary processes that require large areas), conservation professionals need coarse-grained maps to serve as decision-support tools or vision statements and fine-grained maps to prescribe site-specific interventions. To date, research has focused primarily on fine-grained maps (linkage designs) covering small areas. In contrast, we devised 7 steps to coarsely map dozens to hundreds of linkages over a large area, such as a nation, province, or ecoregion. We provide recommendations on how to perform each step on the basis of our experiences with 6 projects: California Missing Linkages (2001), Arizona Wildlife Linkage Assessment (2006), California Essential Habitat Connectivity (2010), Two Countries, One Forest (northeastern United States and southeastern Canada) (2010), Washington State Connected Landscapes (2010), and the Bhutan Biological Corridor Complex (2010). The 2 most difficult steps are mapping natural landscape blocks (areas whose conservation value derives from the species and ecological processes within them) and determining which pairs of blocks can feasibly be connected in a way that promotes conservation. Decision rules for mapping natural landscape blocks and determining which pairs of blocks to connect must reflect not only technical criteria, but also the values and priorities of stakeholders. We recommend blocks be mapped on the basis of a combination of naturalness, protection status, linear barriers, and habitat quality for selected species. We describe manual and automated procedures to identify currently functioning or restorable linkages. Once pairs of blocks have been identified, linkage polygons can be mapped by least-cost modeling, other approaches from graph theory, or individual-based movement models. The approaches we outline make assumptions explicit, have outputs that can be improved as underlying data are improved, and help implementers focus strictly on ecological connectivity.",
keywords = "Conectividad, Conexiones de vida silvestre, Connectivity, Conservation planning, Cooperativas de conservaci{\'o}n del paisaje, Corridors, Especies focales, Focal species, Landscape conservation cooperatives, Planificaci{\'o}n de la conservaci{\'o}n, Wildlife linkages",
author = "Paul Beier and Wayne Spencer and Baldwin, {Robert F.} and Mcrae, {Brad H.}",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01716.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "879--892",
journal = "Conservation Biology",
issn = "0888-8892",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Toward Best Practices for Developing Regional Connectivity Maps

AU - Beier, Paul

AU - Spencer, Wayne

AU - Baldwin, Robert F.

AU - Mcrae, Brad H.

PY - 2011/10

Y1 - 2011/10

N2 - To conserve ecological connectivity (the ability to support animal movement, gene flow, range shifts, and other ecological and evolutionary processes that require large areas), conservation professionals need coarse-grained maps to serve as decision-support tools or vision statements and fine-grained maps to prescribe site-specific interventions. To date, research has focused primarily on fine-grained maps (linkage designs) covering small areas. In contrast, we devised 7 steps to coarsely map dozens to hundreds of linkages over a large area, such as a nation, province, or ecoregion. We provide recommendations on how to perform each step on the basis of our experiences with 6 projects: California Missing Linkages (2001), Arizona Wildlife Linkage Assessment (2006), California Essential Habitat Connectivity (2010), Two Countries, One Forest (northeastern United States and southeastern Canada) (2010), Washington State Connected Landscapes (2010), and the Bhutan Biological Corridor Complex (2010). The 2 most difficult steps are mapping natural landscape blocks (areas whose conservation value derives from the species and ecological processes within them) and determining which pairs of blocks can feasibly be connected in a way that promotes conservation. Decision rules for mapping natural landscape blocks and determining which pairs of blocks to connect must reflect not only technical criteria, but also the values and priorities of stakeholders. We recommend blocks be mapped on the basis of a combination of naturalness, protection status, linear barriers, and habitat quality for selected species. We describe manual and automated procedures to identify currently functioning or restorable linkages. Once pairs of blocks have been identified, linkage polygons can be mapped by least-cost modeling, other approaches from graph theory, or individual-based movement models. The approaches we outline make assumptions explicit, have outputs that can be improved as underlying data are improved, and help implementers focus strictly on ecological connectivity.

AB - To conserve ecological connectivity (the ability to support animal movement, gene flow, range shifts, and other ecological and evolutionary processes that require large areas), conservation professionals need coarse-grained maps to serve as decision-support tools or vision statements and fine-grained maps to prescribe site-specific interventions. To date, research has focused primarily on fine-grained maps (linkage designs) covering small areas. In contrast, we devised 7 steps to coarsely map dozens to hundreds of linkages over a large area, such as a nation, province, or ecoregion. We provide recommendations on how to perform each step on the basis of our experiences with 6 projects: California Missing Linkages (2001), Arizona Wildlife Linkage Assessment (2006), California Essential Habitat Connectivity (2010), Two Countries, One Forest (northeastern United States and southeastern Canada) (2010), Washington State Connected Landscapes (2010), and the Bhutan Biological Corridor Complex (2010). The 2 most difficult steps are mapping natural landscape blocks (areas whose conservation value derives from the species and ecological processes within them) and determining which pairs of blocks can feasibly be connected in a way that promotes conservation. Decision rules for mapping natural landscape blocks and determining which pairs of blocks to connect must reflect not only technical criteria, but also the values and priorities of stakeholders. We recommend blocks be mapped on the basis of a combination of naturalness, protection status, linear barriers, and habitat quality for selected species. We describe manual and automated procedures to identify currently functioning or restorable linkages. Once pairs of blocks have been identified, linkage polygons can be mapped by least-cost modeling, other approaches from graph theory, or individual-based movement models. The approaches we outline make assumptions explicit, have outputs that can be improved as underlying data are improved, and help implementers focus strictly on ecological connectivity.

KW - Conectividad

KW - Conexiones de vida silvestre

KW - Connectivity

KW - Conservation planning

KW - Cooperativas de conservación del paisaje

KW - Corridors

KW - Especies focales

KW - Focal species

KW - Landscape conservation cooperatives

KW - Planificación de la conservación

KW - Wildlife linkages

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052577418&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052577418&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01716.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01716.x

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 879

EP - 892

JO - Conservation Biology

JF - Conservation Biology

SN - 0888-8892

IS - 5

ER -