FY 1999 proposal 198906900

Additional documents

TitleType
198906900 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleAnnual Coded Wire Tag Program - Missing Production OR Htc (ODFW)
Proposal ID198906900
OrganizationOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameMark Lewis
Mailing address28655 Hwy. 34 Corvallis, OR 97333
Phone / email5417574263 / lewisma@ccmail.orst.edu
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinSystemwide / Systemwide
Short descriptionExpand coded wire tag program to include all ODFW Columbia Basin hatchery coho and chinook production releases not tagged by other programs. Monitor hatchery salmon survival trends, evaluate hatchery techniques, provide information for fish management.
Target speciesChinook and Coho salmon stocks reared at Oregon Columbia Basin Hatcheries.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
8906500 Hatchery Production OR/WA/ID (USFWS) Complimentary project for USFWS hatcheries
8906600 Annual Coded Wire Tag Program - Missing Production WA HTCH (WDF) Complimentary project for WDF hatcheries

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 1999 cost
Personnel Proj. Supervisor, Tagging Supervisors, Temporary Taggers $40,276
Fringe Supervisors @ 35%, Taggers @ 43% $15,469
Supplies Coded-wire tags = $45,900, Visual implant tags = $5,000 $59,790
Operating Obj 2. Tag rec. (est 5,146 @ $7/head) $36,022
Travel Mileage @ PerDiem $3,040
Indirect @ 22.9% $35,403
Subcontractor None $0
$190,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$190,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$190,000
FY 1999 forecast from 1998$0
% change from forecast0.ToString("0.0%"))
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Outyear budget totals

(working on it)

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Production and release of hatchery salmonids in the Columbia Basin is regulated by NMFS under the Endangered Species Act. Specific groups to be tagged depend on funding for the production and tagging of hatchery salmon in Oregon. .


Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Recommendation:
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Comments:

Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Yes

Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Yes

Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Yes

Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Yes:


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:


Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

As with 8906500, the title is bad and there is a need for review and coordination across the coded-wire tag projects. However, this proposal was better written and ranked in the middle of the set. It includes good objectives, tasks, rationale and history, and it is well related to the Fish and Wildlife Program and the biological opinion. It does not give relationships to the PSMFC coded wire tag project (8201300) and the abstract is poor. Are the data being used as expected?