FY 1999 proposal 199005200

Additional documents

TitleType
199005200 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titlePerformance/Stock Productivity Impacts of Hatchery Supplementation
Proposal ID199005200
OrganizationBiological Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameReg Reisenbichler
Mailing address6505 NE 65th St. Seattle, WA 98115
Phone / email2065266282 / Reg_Reisenbichler@usgs.gov
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinSystemwide / Systemwide
Short descriptionProvide increased understanding of reputed failure of supplementation w/steelhead in Idaho's Clearwater River & an improved basis for planning/modifying supplementation programs & program evaluations by measuring genetic effects from artificial propagatio
Target speciesAnadromous Oncorhynchus spp. (particularly steelhead and spring chinook salmon) throughout the Columbia River basin (and throughout their range).
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

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 $157,973
Fringe $45,022
Supplies $48,756
Operating $11,832
Travel $18,312
Indirect $111,615
Subcontractor $102,983
$496,493
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$496,493
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$496,493
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: Identify any constraints that may cause schedule changes. Describe major milestones if necessary. Arbitrary budget reductions, such as the arbitrary reduction of our budget for 1998 by $41,000, will postpone or preclude completion of objectives because we will have inadequate manpower to accomplish the field and lab work and report preparation.


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:

The funding difference will be accommodated by reduced work load.
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This is an excellent study that ranked high in the set although the proposal quality could be improved. The objectives are written more as tasks but are well planned. The abstract is not adequate but the science is good. This project has been ongoing since around 1990 and should have provided a more specific description of results--where does the study stand now?