FY 2001 Innovative proposal 22041
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
Title | Type |
---|---|
22041 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Using Microbial Fingerprinting to Rapidly Assess Ecosystem Responses to Watershed Restoration Efforts and Assist in Prioritizing Future Activities |
Proposal ID | 22041 |
Organization | Washington State University (WSU) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Darin Saul |
Mailing address | PO Box 643003 Pullman, WA 99164-3003 |
Phone / email | 5093353357 / sauld@wsu.edu |
Manager authorizing this project | Dan Nordquist |
Review cycle | FY 2001 Innovative |
Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Clearwater |
Short description | This project will use microbial fingerprinting to develop a scientifically defensible classification scheme to indicate the biological integrity of potential salmonid habitat throughout the Columbia River Basin. |
Target species | Aquatic Ecosystem |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|---|---|
46.4 | -115.66 | Clearwater subbasin |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
RPA |
---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Year | Accomplishment |
---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | FTE: 1.7 | $63,999 |
Fringe | 26% on salary and tuition for grad student | $19,510 |
Supplies | sample analysis and lab supplies | $52,000 |
Travel | for sampling trips | $10,000 |
Indirect | 26% of direct costs - equipment and tuition | $36,266 |
Capital | Biolog 3E, Sediment Sampler, Velocity Meter | $19,800 |
PIT tags | $0 | |
Subcontractor | $0 | |
Other | Total | $201,575 |
$403,150 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost | $403,150 |
Total FY 2001 budget request | $403,150 |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This proposal is innovative because it proposes to develop a new procedure, microbial fingerprinting, as an indicator of biological integrity of streams. If fully developed the procedure might be a viable competitor to the use of invertebrates or amphibians as indicators of biological integrity and a potential cost-effective means of classifying ecosystem type, health and response to restoration activities. However, the link to the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program is not clearly argued. A microbial index to biological integrity does not seem particularly high priority when viewed against the needs of the Columbia system.Comment:
Budget exceeds $400,000.Comment:
Budget exceeds $400,000.