ABSTRACT
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
Wildlife management has been traditionally separated, though not too cleanly, into the management of populations and the management of habitats of targeted species (Leopold 1933). Most species of management attention were game species (species that were hunted), species trapped because of the value of pelts, or (much more recently) species determined to be threatened or endangered — or likely to be accorded such status. This separation between species management and habitat management can never be complete, because many species have the capability to dramatically influence their own habitats and, simultaneously, the habitats of myriad other species.
