asked to indicate which regional list(s) of river reaches they 

 would like to review. All who responded were sent the same 

 printouts mailed to the managers. A master file was compiled from 

 all the additions and corrections made by managers and users and 

 completed the recreational assessment. 



BOTANICAL FEATURES 



In the botanical natural features portion of the Montana 

 Rivers Study, 400 unique or exemplary sites were identified along 

 Montana's rivers. Rather than systematically evaluating segments 

 of all major rivers, individual sites were chosen primarily on the 

 basis of both published information and advice from acknowledged 

 experts. Most sites contained endangered and threatened plants, 

 rare or unique plant communities, or previously designated natural 

 areas. Just as the identification of sites reflects the 

 collective experience of these sources, the total number and 

 geographic distribution of the sites is limited by their 

 collective experience as well. It is, therefore, possible that 

 many additional high value class sites have not been included. 



Value class assignments were entirely subjective and were 

 based on the recommendations of the experts interviewed and on the 

 professional judgment of the Montana Department of Natural 

 Resources and Conservation staff involved in the project. Where 

 there was uncertainty regarding a value class assignment, the 

 higher value class was assigned with the understanding that the 

 value classes would be adjusted as the study continued. 



The final value class for a site was equal to the highest 

 rating given any one of these four criteria that were used to 

 evaluate the site: 



A) Scarcity or rarity. Refers to the overall rarity of the 

 botanical natural features. The highest rating was given to 

 sites that contained features that are very rare on a 

 worldwide or national level, and the lowest rating was given 

 to sites that had elements present elsewhere in Montana. 



B) Previous designation. Used to rate sites according to 

 whether they had been previously designated for protection by 

 a government or private agency. For example, some sites have 

 been officially proposed as Research Natural Areas (RNAs) by 

 the U. S. Forest Service or potential National Natural 

 Landmarks by the U.S. Department of Interior. These and other 

 nationally recognized sites were given the highest rating (I). 

 Other sites held either statewide significance, local 

 significance or no official recognition. 



C) Public and recreational use. Sites were subjectively rated 

 according to their existing level of public and recreational 



