Cascades Frog Predicted Habitat - CWHR A042 [ds2008]

<div style='text-align:Left;'><div><div><p><span>CWHR Predicted Habitat Models represent areas of predicted suitable habitat for each species within its range. These models are built from the following principal inputs: </span></p><p><span>1) a statewide, best-available vegetation map (FVEG);  </span></p><p><span>2) GIS data representing a species’ range;  </span></p><p><span>3) the CWHR database of habitat suitability values for over 700 terrestrial vertebrate species. </span></p><p><span>Habitat suitability ranks of Low (non-zero values less than 0.34), Medium (0.34-0.66), and High (greater than 0.66) are based on the maximum suitability value across the 3 species life requisites: reproduction, feeding, and cover. Note that previous versions of these Predicted Habitat Models used an average across the 3 life requisites in order to obtain an overall suitability score for each habitat type and stage class.  Habitat suitability scores were developed based on habitat patch sizes greater than 40 acres in size and are best interpreted for habitat patches greater than 200 acres in size. The FVEG landcover dataset is an aggregation of multiple statewide landcover and regional vegetation mapping efforts, conducted at different points in time (approximately 1990 up to time of publishing) and at various resolutions, compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE). FVEG uses the most current and consistent data available for each region of the state. Decision rules were developed that controlled which layers were given priority in areas of overlap. Crosswalks were used to attribute the various data sources according to the CWHR habitat-type classification system. Attributing FVEG with CWHR habitat types allows for the extraction of areas with non-zero suitability values for each species within the bounds of its range, creating a series of maps of predicted suitable habitat which are species-specific. Because FVEG is an amalgam of disparate landcover assessment efforts across the state, the predictive power for determining suitable habitat will vary between species, and possibly even regionally for species which are widely distributed. While these maps represent CDFW’s best estimate of the presence of suitable habitat for any given species in the CWHR system, these maps are also limited by several factors: 1) the accuracy and resolution of vegetation maps in a given region; 2) the dynamic nature of the landscape in which fire and other disturbance events alter conditions at a greater frequency than mapping efforts can track; 3) the currency of expert knowledge, particularly as species adapt to changing land and climate conditions and the shifting of other species’ ranges; 4) the frequency of species-specific surveys across a representative sample of a species’ entire range; 5) metapopulation dynamics, which describes the shifting of populations within their environment as result of numerous types of interactions and responses. </span></p><p><span>CWHR GIS data representing predicted suitable habitat should not be used to indicate the presence or absence of a particular species at any specific site. CWHR predicted habitat models are named according to the 4-character alpha-numeric CWHR ID assigned to each species (5 characters in the case of subspecies or other sub-taxa). There is also a “CWHR Revision Tracking Table” containing a record for each species, its CWHR ID, scientific name, common name, and range and habitat model data revision history. CWHR species range models, predicted habitat models, and GIS data of the statewide distribution of all CWHR habitat types, along with the CWHR revision tracking table, are available for download at </span><a href='https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR' target='_blank' style='text-decoration:underline;' rel='nofollow ugc noopener noreferrer'><span>https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR</span></a><span>. </span></p></div></div></div>