supported a moderate density of this species. A rating 

 of 1 indicated a unit supported a low density of this 

 species or habitat was patchy or marginal. 



Each of the game and furbearer species was assigned 

 a weighting from 2-4 depending on the level of concern 

 determined in the original criteria and standards 

 (Appendix A in Graham 1985). High concern species-- 

 white-tail deer, elk, bighorn sheep, moose, black bear, 

 river otter and turkey--received a weighting of 4 

 (Table 2). These species were included as a species of 

 high concern because of their regional game signif- 

 icance or their dependence on riparian habitat. Species 

 of intermediate concern included all other game and 

 furbearer species that were dependent seasonally on 

 riparian habitats and/or species of high concern not 

 associated with river bottoms. These species were 

 given a weighting of 3. All other game and furbearer 

 species were given a weighting of 2. The weighted 

 value was multiplied by the importance value or habitat 

 suitability rating to determine points for each 

 species. Points for each species were then added to 

 determine a unit's species diversity and importance. 



Specialized Wildlife Areas 



Points were awarded to a unit for each specialized 

 wildlife use. Areas used by species of special concern 

 --the harlequin duck, amphibians/ and reptiles--were 

 given 12 points. All other uses by wetland species or 

 raptors were given 9 points. 



Species Value Calculation 



Points were accumulated for each type of species 



value: threatened and endangered species; game and 



furbearer use and densities; and specialized wildlife 

 ,T,i_- _--_.^_ ___ ...-,,■, .. •,. . ., final 



id 

 iO 



value: threatened and endangered species; game anc 

 furbearer use and densities; and specialized wildlife 

 areas. The points were totalled to determine the fina: 

 species value. Point ranges for Class I, II, III, anc 

 IV were 101 to 164, 67 to 100, 51 to 66 and 15 to 5( 

 points, respectively. 



Because of the constraint posed by threatened and 

 endangered species on hydrodevelopment and other land 

 use changes, considerable points were awarded where 

 these species and/or potential recovery habitat existed 

 (a maximum of 50 points for bald eagle). All other 

 species, including species of high and special concern, 

 received a maximum of 12 points. A unit with a 

 diversity of species in high densities could not 

 accumulate sufficient points to reach a Class I rating 

 without the presence of endangered or threatened 



10 



