FY 2003 Mainstem/Systemwide proposal 200309700
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 |
|---|---|
| 35045 Narrative | Narrative |
| Adaptive Management Platform for Natural Resources in the Columbia River Basin | Narrative Attachment |
| 35045 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Modeling and Information Management System to Assess Effectiveness of Alternative Actions |
| Proposal ID | 200309700 |
| Organization | Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Dr. Richard Skaggs |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 999 Richland, Wa |
| Phone / email | 5093755900 / richard.skaggs@pnl.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | Dr. Richard Skaggs |
| Review cycle | Mainstem/Systemwide |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / |
| Short description | |
| Target species | Chinook salmon, steelhead, ranbow and bull trout. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| This project will develop system-wide capabilities and address system-wide issues |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| 183 |
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Ongoing Planning, and Assessment, and mitigation studies in the Methow River watershed. Ongoing planning, assessment, and mitigation studies in the South Fork Salmon River watershed. | These data and activites within these watersheds will provide the basis for demenonstating the modeling and data management system and the methods for assessing action effective that will be developed by this project. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Develop model and data managments system | Phase 1 | 2003 | $250,000 | Yes |
| Implement system on Methow and South Fork Salmon Rivers | Phase 1- includes IWRRI nad SWWRC | 2003 | $250,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continue model and data management system development (Phase 2) | 2004 | 2004 | $225,000 |
| Implement model and data management system development (Phase 2) | 2004 | 2004 | $275,000 |
| Continue model and data management system development (Phase 3) | 2005 | 2005 | $200,000 |
| Implement model and data management system development (Phase 3) | 2005 | 2005 | $300,000 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|
| $500,000 | $500,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 |
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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 |
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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 |
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 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | $131,609 | |
| Fringe | Included in above | $0 |
| Supplies | Server/Computer, supplies | $13,547 |
| Travel | To site locations | $3,657 |
| Indirect | Org OH, Gen. & Admin Exp., Service Assess. | $156,187 |
| Subcontractor | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife $20K, Mobrand Biometrics, Inc $25K | $45,000 |
| Other | $75K each directly to SWWRC and IWRRI (no subcontracting overhead cost included) | $150,000 |
| $500,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $500,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $500,000 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife | Assessment of habitat conditions and proposed actions assessment of artificial production progams and proposed actions @ $85K/ year | $255,000 | in-kind |
| Idaho Department of Fish and Game | Assessment of habitat conditions and proposed actions @ $75K/yr | $225,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Aug 2, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. This proposal is to develop a model and information system (MADIMS) to support the RME program by developing 3 functional capabilities: spatial and temporal scale changes in data, information and models; hypothesis testing; information exploitation. The goal of building a complex model to allow alternative actions to be evaluated without experiments is laudable. The difficulty is in the details of building a model that is realistic enough to be useful, yet tractable for solution. Models may predict cause-effect relationships but to establish such relationships requires links to empirical data.The proposal does not provide a clear picture of how the model building will be done. The response should provide more details such as exactly how neural networks and fuzzy logic will be used to obtain models. The response should describe how the project could contribute to the CBFWA (or other) systemwide design based M&E project by providing modeling aspects for making predictions based on data.
This is an expensive project with a budget that is suspiciously rounded.
Comment:
This project addresses RPA 183. The model developed by this proposal would not be directly applicable to other subbasins without creation of a supporting database. The states are not staffed up to support transfer of this model for it's use in other basins and the creation of the supporting databases, or the software language that the model will be developed in. Buy-in by the participating agencies will be required for successful implementation of this project.Comment:
Do not fund. Disagree with CBFWA's Recommended Action ranking. This proposal is to develop a model and information system (MADIMS) to support the RME program by developing 3 functional capabilities: 1) spatial and temporal scale changes in data, information and models; 2) hypothesis testing; 3) information exploitation. The goal of building a complex model to allow alternative actions to be evaluated without experiments is laudable. The difficulty is in the details of building a model that is realistic enough to be useful, yet tractable for solution. Models may predict cause-effect relationships but to establish such relationships requires links to empirical data.The ambitious goals of using a system to manage models and data to capture cause-effect relationships in the region seem to be unattainable. The proponents exhibit an expectation that models can establish cause and effect relationships. Furthermore, the proposed framework supports identifying and prioritizing future model developments raising a concern about how models will be selected for inclusion and how competing models be compared?
The response overall, while interesting in its description of the application of neural networks and fuzzy logic in information-poor environments, does not allay earlier concerns that the modeling framework to be developed would have "legs" in the region; i.e. be adopted and used in a way that will enhance understanding and knowledge. The response to questions about the budget fails to provide information as to its components and magnitude. Finally, every research project funded by the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program must have an adequate monitoring and evaluation plan.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitNo direct or indirect biological benefit of work. Proposed information management system for integration of effectiveness monitoring programs implemented under FCRPS BiOp RPA 183.
Comments
A weak proposal with very high ambitions. Not clear if goals are reachable, or able to assess this aspect due to lack of details in proposal.
Already ESA Required?
No
Biop?
No
Comment:
Category:3. Other projects not recommended by staff
Comments: