FY 1999 proposal 9041
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 |
---|---|
9041 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Enhance/Protect Imperiled Native Fish Species Through Improved Education... |
Proposal ID | 9041 |
Organization | Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Heather M. Pier |
Mailing address | 490 N. Meridian Rd. Kalispell, MT 59901 |
Phone / email | 4067514563 / kbrooks@mt.gov |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 1999 |
Province / Subbasin | Upper Columbia / Kootenai, Flathead |
Short description | Provide educational and informational services to the public on issues relating to enhancement of bull trout, cutthroat trout, sturgeon, red band rainbow and other imperiled fisheries, and their corresponding habitats |
Target species |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | $24,998 | |
Fringe | $7,931 | |
Supplies | $12,097 | |
Operating | $10,800 | |
Travel | $4,027 | |
Indirect | $10,685 | |
Subcontractor | $3,000 | |
$73,538 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost | $73,538 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 1999 budget request | $73,538 |
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: None.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Presentation: Previous studies showed that 50% of the people had difficulty correctly identifying fish. As a result, the public may be inadvertently taking fish the regulations are designed to protect. This project funds one person to go to schools to teach fishing ethics and species identification. There is also an ongoing cooperative effort under which MDFWP has distributed pamphlets and installed display boxes (showing lake, bull, rainbow, and cutthroat trout models) to help the public identify fish.Questions/Answers:
What Council Program measure does this project address? Answer: The link is weak, the project doesn't address a specific measure.
How does harvest compliance relate to hydropower losses and Bonneville's responsibilities? Answer: Harvest compliance is based on knowledge. The fish are in weak condition because of the hydro impacts. We don't have any outreach currently and we have a catch-and-release policy. All of us have to foster public awareness and assistance within what we are doing.
Could this be done under your watershed projects? Answer: We could put it there.
Comment: Similar states are not requesting funding for this in the same way. Isn't this a state responsibility?
Did you see any significant decline in illegal bull trout harvest resulting from your ongoing outreach programs? Answer: The enforcement project used to fund sting operations of poaching. There were about 29.7 illegal harvests (extrapolated from busts) in the tributaries per week.
Did the inadvertent mistakes decline with education? Answer: I don't know. Probably not.
Screening Criteria: No. Project does not address a specific Council measure.
Technical Criteria: Yes. There is no evidence this activity actually reduced incidental catch of bull trout.
Programmatic Criteria: No. There is no clear hydro connection considering other activities in area.
General Comment: This does not appear to be a ratepayer obligation. Funding should come from a different source.
Comment:
See CBFWA Committee CommentsComment:
This was a hard proposal to review because it is educational in focus, but the educational purpose to help anglers identify different species is valuable. The proposal gives little information on monitoring for results and evaluating the program. Relationships to other projects are vague (no specific projects). The objectives list is good, including monitoring achievement. The project seems worthwhile, but review is not truly a scientific call. The project should have more direct ties to other BPA projects. Is BPA an appropriate funding source for this? Where is the Council’s policy line between mitigation and education?