FY 1999 proposal 199603302
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 |
---|---|
199603302 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Evaluate the Feasibillity and Potential Risks of Restoring Yakima R. Coho |
Proposal ID | 199603302 |
Organization | Yakama Indian Nation (YIN) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Mel Sampson |
Mailing address | P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 |
Phone / email | 5098656262 / yinfish@yakama.com |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 1999 |
Province / Subbasin | Lower Mid-Columbia / Yakima |
Short description | Test new supplementation techniques to increase natural production and improve harvest opportunities, while maintaining genetic fitness of salmonid populations; and, provide critical knowledge to resource managers throughout the Columbia River Basin. |
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 |
---|---|---|
8812001 | Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Management | Core Management/Admin Support services for all YIN’s YKFP Tasks |
8811500 | Yakima Hatchery Construction | Final design/construction of needed acclimation facilities/wells for YKFP |
9701300 | Yakima Cle Elum Hatchery O&M | O&M costs for Cle Elum supplentation and research facilities. Core facility for the YKFP. |
9506300 | Yakima/Klickitat M&E Program | Covers the diverse M&E needs for the target species which are essential for the success of the YKFP. |
8812005 | Fish passage video monitoring | Monitors, at Prosser and Roza dams, the adult salmonids returning to the Yakima basin. |
9706200 | Objectives and strategies for Yakima | Represents the modeling process, for iterative planning for species consistent with the regional assessment of supplementation project. |
9603301 | Yakima river fall chinook supplementation O&M | Essential for YKFP’s all stock initiative for experimental purposes for supplementation |
8812008 | Fisheries Technician Field Activities | Provides essential technical support to fulfill the diverse needs of the YKFPi.e. M&E support, surveys, juvenile fac. operations, marking, etc. |
9506404 | Policy/Tech involvement/Planning-YKFP | Supports the required co-manager process for the YKFP. |
9506406 | Monitoring of supplementation response variables for YKFP | Essential for adequate M&E planning and technical participation as co-managers of the YKFP. |
9506402 | Upper Yakima species interaction studies | M&E function relative to behavior of multi species within the Yakima Basin for the YKFP. Defines competitive/ecological interactions. |
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 | Admin, Biologist, Technicians, Research | $150,000 |
Fringe | @ 25.3 % | $37,950 |
Supplies | $65,000 | |
Operating | $216,550 | |
Capital | M & E equipment, Rearing facility improvements | $95,000 |
Travel | Project oversight, M&E and fish propagation crews, Training | $35,000 |
Indirect | 26.6% 1997 rate | $140,500 |
Subcontractor | Sea Springs; USFS | $70,000 |
$810,000 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost | $810,000 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 1999 budget request | $810,000 |
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: NEPA determinations, Unpredictable low brood year, Budget constraints.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Yes
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Incomplete: Reduce to approx. 10 pg. (submitted as 35 pg.), Relate Abstract, Description of Objectives (Sec. 7b.) to this project specifically and to Sec. 4 Objectives. Please define methods for project tasks. Describe how tasks will be accomplished. Clarify the term "Develop" in Methods (Tasks 1d, 1e, 2c, 5a, 62). How will the competition and predation experiments be designed?
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Yes
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Yes
Comment:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)
YKFP Inadequate proposal, adequate purpose as a set
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
The project history does not discuss coho nor does it give results of previous work--only administrative references. The methods are not specific; the proposal only describes what will be done, not how. The description of monitoring is vague.