FY 2000 proposal 199500900

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Cost sharing

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Operation of reservoir drawdown and refill has an adverse effect on net pen operations.

Reviews and recommendations

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

Comment:

Comments: This is a proposal to use net pens in Lake Roosevelt to continue the rearing process for fish, largely rainbow trout, used for stocking of the lake in mitigation for Grand Coulee Dam. It is a part of the sequence of actions for this stocking that involves several projects for gamete collection, incubation, and rearing. Rainbow trout are presently perceived as an integral part of the Lake Roosevelt enhancement program and rearing trout in net pens in the reservoir has proven effective. Continuation of the project requires administrative and maintenance costs, which this proposal solicits.

This is a good project proposal that warrants continued funding. The proposal quality fell in the midrange of proposals reviewed. Several FWP measures are cited, as well as the Upper Columbia River Blocked Area Management Plan. The work is coordinated with 5 other projects, as listed in the front part and in the narrative. The work depends on other projects for fish to be raised in the net pens and for monitoring. Clear O&M accomplishments are listed. The proposal is a bit confusing in asking for upgrade to production of 500,000 fish when this number was produced in 1996-98 (the request seems to have been old text from the start of the project). There is good cost sharing and excellent use of volunteers (both for labor and commitment to the resource). A good background narrative is followed by a good discussion of rationale/significance and an excellent methods description. A strength of this proposal is that a monitoring and evaluation program is already in place (9494300). This project seems to be an excellent use of funding. Pending the results of the artificial propagation review, funding is recommended. This project seems to be a good candidate for multi-year funding. Integration under an umbrella would be desirable.

This proposal for FY2001 should contain some clarification and/or evaluation of the effects of expected increasing production to 500,000 fish. If this is a large increase, what is the justification? How will its effects be monitored? What increase in harvest is expected? What effects on other fish are anticipated? What about using native species? As noted for other projects that are linked in the propagation series, the entire effort needs to critically evaluate non-native substitution and possibly shift into production of native species such as redband.

Comment:

Comment:

Technical Criteria: yes

Programmatic Criteria: yes

Milestone Criteria: no- The biological objectives are ending in 2000, and there are no long term milestones.

Comment:

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website