The first two sections of this paper are concerned with defining and bounding communities, and describing those attributes of the community that are quantifiable and suitable for wildlife impact assessment purposes. Prior to the development or use of a community model, it is important to have a clear understanding of the concept of a community and a knowledge of the types of community attributes that can serve as outputs for the development of models. Clearly defined, unambiguous model outputs are essential for three reasons: (1) to ensure that the measured community attributes relate to the wildlife resource objectives of the study; (2) to allow testing of the outputs in experimental studies, to determine accuracy, and to allow for improvements based on such testing; and (3) to enable others to clearly understand the community attribute that has been measured.

The third section of this paper described input variables that may be used to predict various community attributes. These input variables do not include direct measures of wildlife populations. Most impact assessments involve projects that result in drastic changes in habitat, such as changes in land use, vegetation, or available area. Therefore, the model input variables described in this section deal primarily with habitat related features.

Several existing community models are described in the fourth section of this paper. A general description of each model is provided, including the nature of the input variables and the model output. The logic and assumptions of each model are discussed, along with data requirements needed to use the model.

The fifth section provides guidance on the selection and development of community models. Identification of the community attribute that is of concern will determine the type of model most suitable for a particular application. This section provides guidelines on selected an existing model, as well as a discussion of the major steps to be followed in modifying an existing model or developing a new model. Considerations associated with the use of community models with the Habitat Evaluation Procedures are also discussed.

The final section of the paper summarizes major findings of interest to field biologists and provides recommendations concerning the implementation of selected concepts in wildlife community analyses.