Maps of vertebrate distributions resulting from the Kansas Gap Analysis were compared with maps based on ecological-niche modeling of primary point-occurrence information. The latter maps were considerably more predictive of independent sets of test data than were the Gap maps, further supporting the idea that the method of Gap wildlife-habitat modeling has little analytical power. In general, the Kansas Gap maps were untested and unchecked, thus being heterogeneous, unreliable, and of little use for further analyses.