Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
particular set of species. Indirect methods of <br />evaluation, on the other hand, can be applied to <br />large areas and broad categories of species. <br />The direct and indirect approaches comple- <br />ment each other. For instance, direct methods, <br />like the preliminary surveys described in <br />Appendix I, serve to refine more comprehensive <br />indirect methods. For this reason alone, Orange <br />County needs more surveys of its forests and <br />wildlife. <br />The following sections develop the broad <br />view afforded by an indirect approach, as a way <br />to promote thinking about a Landscape with <br />Wildlife. <br />The procedure we propose consists of a <br />rating system that takes into account the size, <br />maturity, disturbance by human activities, and <br />"edginess" of forests. It also takes into account <br />special habitats recognized by the 1988 <br />Inventory of Natural Areas in Orange County and <br />bodies of water such as streams or rivers. <br />The procedure also includes the importance <br />of connections between forests. The <br />value of a forest for wildlife <br />depends not only on its <br />own, intrinsic features <br />but also on the <br />surrounding area, its <br />contextual features. <br />Forests with other <br />forests nearby offer <br />possibilities for ` <br />movements of <br />individuals between <br />patches of forest. For <br />any tract of forest we thus <br />need separate intrinsic <br />and contextual ratings <br />for its contributions to <br />landscape with wildlife. <br />10 <br />We first propose ratings for tracts of forest, <br />such as those defined by the forest cover map of <br />Orange County. These ratings can serve to iden- <br />tify the most important tracts of forest remain- <br />ing in Orange County. They can provide an <br />index of progress in maintaining Orange County <br />as a Landscape with Wildlife. They can also be <br />used to assess the consequences of changes in <br />one forested tract on the value for wildlife of <br />nearby tracts. <br />Tracts defined by types of forest do not <br />usually correspond to those defined by property <br />boundaries. Consequently, we also show how the <br />ratings can be applied to tracts defined by prop- <br />erty boundaries. This application can indicate <br />how a proposed use of a particular property will <br />affect wildlife in the County and how it will <br />affect the value of nearby tracts for wildlife. <br />White Oak <br />