River Assessment Onit JK3 



H.D. % % 



#. H.D. Pressure Success Non-resident 



Deer 102 40 10 6 



110 20 5 4 



120 40 5 4 



Deer Recreation Points = [(.4x10) + (.4x6) + 

 (.4x0)] + [(.2x5) + (.2x4) + (.2x0)] + [(.4x5) 

 + (.4x4) + (.4x0)] 



A qualitative relative ranking was collected for 

 each species listed on the questionnaire. This ranking 

 reflected the overall hunting effort that occurred 

 within a unit compared to the rest of the hunting 

 district in which the unit was located. These rankings 

 were used to evaluate all other game species not in- 

 cluded in the computer analysis. 



DATA ANALYSIS 



All data from the questionnaire were entered and 

 analyzed using the MDFWP Region 1 Action Discovery 

 Computer System with DataStar and ReportStar software. 

 DataStar was used to enter the data gathered by the 

 questionnaire, including the unit description and the 

 habitat, species, and recreation information. Data 

 collected from the questionnaire and the computer 

 analyses of the four big game species were integrated 

 using ReportStar. Data were weighted and given points, 

 points within a criteria were totalled, and final 

 resource values based on the total points were deter- 

 mined. ReportStar allowed weights and points of 

 specific standards to be altered as necessary. 



REVIEW 



Review of the assessment process occurred through- 

 out the study. The Wildlife Task F reviewed the 

 original assessment guidelines, the questionnaire, the 

 determination of the value classes, and the final 

 resource values. Participating biologists were given 

 the opportunity to review a summary of the final 

 ratings, the ratings and points for each criteria, and 

 the complete database by region. 



16 



