FY 2003 Mainstem/Systemwide proposal 200307300
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 |
---|---|
35011 Narrative | Narrative |
35011 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | The Floating Net Pen Transportation System Pilot Project |
Proposal ID | 200307300 |
Organization | Columbia Basin Fishery Restoration L.L.C. (CBFR LLC) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Fred Simmons |
Mailing address | 2027 Narrows View Circle NW. E-243 Gig Harbor, Washington, 98335 |
Phone / email | 2538532004 / williestrong@earthlink.net |
Manager authorizing this project | William Strong |
Review cycle | Mainstem/Systemwide |
Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / |
Short description | The transportation of Chinook salmon smolts in floating net pens from various fish hatcheries and collector systems ,to be released at the mouth of the Columbia River or in the Pacific Ocean. |
Target species | Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|---|---|
Columbia River Basin Mainstem System Wide |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
RPA |
---|
41 |
42 |
47 |
49 |
53 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Year | Accomplishment |
---|---|
Not Applicable |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|---|---|
This pilot project will stand on it's own merit and it's success will be based on the overall performance.of the project. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. Engineering and Design | a. Design skeleton float | 2003 | $35,000 | Yes |
b. Design net pen frame and nets | 2003 | $25,000 | Yes | |
c. Design raceway for salmon fry | 2003 | $40,000 | Yes | |
2. Analysis and program design | a.Meet with agencies for requirements and responsibilities. | 2003 | $75,000 |
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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
1.Construction of Skeleton Floats | a.Construct | 2003 | $406,250 | Yes |
2. Construction of Net Pen Frames | a.Construct | 2003 | $358,625 | Yes |
3. Nets for Net Pens | a. Purchase | 2003 | $45,000 | |
4. Vessels for transportation | a. Purchase | 2003 | $250,000 | |
b.Fitting vessels for transportation | 2003 | $75,000 | Yes | |
5. Vehicles Company Transportation | a.Purchase | 2003 | $110,000 | |
6. Receive juvenile salmon smolts and rearing | a.Purchace from Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife | 2003 | $112,000 | Yes |
7. Smolt food | a. Purchase | 2003 | $5,000 | |
8. Vessel Fuel for transport of smolts | a. Purchase | 2003 | $86,400 | |
9. Install raceways | a. Construct | 2003 | $95,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1. Receive juvenile salmon smolts and rearing | 2004 | 2007 | $448,000 |
2. Smolt food | 2004 | 2007 | $20,000 |
3. Vessel Fuel for tranport of smolts | 2004 | 2007 | $380,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
---|---|---|---|
$203,400 | $203,400 | $203,400 | $203,400 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. Administative and Management Personal | a. Compensation | 2003 | $591,000 | |
2.Operational and Technical Personal | a.Compensation | 2003 | $266,000 | |
3. Contract with Universities | a.University of Washington | 2003 | $62,000 | Yes |
b.Oregon State University | 2003 | $62,000 | Yes | |
c.University of Idaho | 2003 | $62,000 | Yes | |
4. Office space and equipment | a. Rent office space | 2003 | $25,000 | |
b. Purchase equipment | 2003 | $25,000 | ||
5. Maintenance of Equipment | a.Vessels and Floating Net Pens | 2003 | $75,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1.Administrative and Management Personal | 2004 | 2007 | $2,364,000 |
2. Operational and Technical Personal | 2004 | 2007 | $1,064,000 |
3. Contracts with Universities | 2004 | 2007 | $744,000 |
4. Maintance of Equipment | 2004 | 2007 | $300,000 |
5. Office Space Rent | 2004 | 2007 | $100,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
---|---|---|---|
$1,118,000 | $1,118,000 | $1,118,000 | $1,118,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
1.Coded-wire tags Transported Groups 50,000 fish per group and 4 groups | a.Tag Salmon smolts | 2003 | $160,000 | Yes |
2. Coded-wire-tags Inriver Groups 50,000 fish per group and 4 groups | a.Tag Salmon smolts | 2003 | $160,000 | Yes |
3. Project reporting and prentation | a. Provide written reports of actual tranportaion data. | 2003 | $35,000 | |
4.Report distribution | a. Supply documentation upon request | 2003 | $50,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1. Tag trasnported and inriver groups with coded-wire-tags | 2004 | 2007 | $1,440,000 |
2. Project reporting and distribution | 2004 | 2007 | $160,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
---|---|---|---|
$405,000 | $405,000 | $405,000 | $405,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | FTE: 13 | $645,000 |
Fringe | $212,000 | |
Supplies | $226,400 | |
Travel | $75,000 | |
Indirect | $0 | |
Capital | $405,000 | |
NEPA | Categorical exclusion (CX) | $0 |
Subcontractor | 1. Industial Plastic Inc. Design and construct skeleton float and net pen frames | $824,875 |
Subcontractor | 2. Design raceways and construct to be determined | $135,000 |
Subcontractor | 3.Fitting vessels for transportation to be determined | $75,000 |
Subcontractor | 4. Washington Depatment of Fish and Wildlife | $432,000 |
Subcontractor | 5.University of Washington | $62,000 |
Subcontractor | 6.Oregon State University | $62,000 |
Subcontractor | 7. University of Idaho | $62,000 |
Subcontractor | 8.Maintance of Equipment to be determined | $75,000 |
$3,291,275 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost | $3,291,275 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2003 budget request | $3,291,275 |
FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
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.
Do not fund - no response required
Aug 2, 2002
Comment:
Not fundable. The experimental design is not technically sufficient. The proposal does not specify what benefits might be expected from use of net pens relative to existing methods of transportation of juvenile salmon, nor how any such benefits would be obtained or measured. Neither the need for transfer nor the method to be used for transfer of fish from hatchery raceways or other sources to the net pens is discussed in the proposal.The reviewers are aware of an experiment on gas bubble trauma conducted by Earl Dawley that employed net pens in the Columbia River. Dawley couldn't keep the net pens together. The proposers should review that experiment.
Action Agency/NMFS RME Group Comments:
OCEAN AND ESTUARY SUBGROUP -- Potential action items addressed - 187; 195. The artificial transportation aspect of this proposal is not in concert with the habitat restoration efforts and proposed research on ecosystem function of the lower river and estuary currently being conducted by LCREP, NMFS, and others.
ISRP Remarks on RME Group Comments:
The RME Group comments are descriptive. There is no conflict between the ISRP and RME Group comments.
Comment:
The proposal is technically inadequate, and does not clearly demonstrate the proposed approach would solve or alleviate current transportation issues. For example, the proposers expect improved imprinting and improved homing response through the use of net pens. Transportation would have to originate in rearing or nursery areas to achieve this outcome, and methods to collect and transport juveniles from nursery areas are not presented. As proposed, the project would only investigate transportation in the Columbia River from a single hatchery.Comment:
Do Not Fund; agree with CBFWA. The proposal is incomplete. While the response attempts to deal with many of the comments by the ISRP, it still falls short of being adequate to accomplish its stated objective, "Net pens are proposed as a low cost alternative to the present system of transporting molts in the Columbia River.", page 1 of the response. No method is described for comparing the performance (survival or return rates) of fish transported in net pens with those transported "in the present system".Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitPotentially increases the survival of transported fish by providing more natural migration conditions through the use of net pens rather than barges. This may allow the transported fish to obtain better directional preference.
Comments
This proposal has little potential biological benefit. The use of net pens as an appropriate transport vessel is very questionable. The pens are unlikely to maintain rigidity and there would be concerns about the ability of the transported fish to keep pace with the pen's movement. The concept has many potential shortcomings that probably outweigh the benefits.
Already ESA Required?
No
Biop?
No
Comment:
Category:3. Other projects not recommended by staff
Comments: