FY 2000 proposal 199600800
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 |
---|---|
199600800 Narrative | Narrative |
199600800 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Stufa Participation in a Plan for Analyzing and Testing Hypotheses (PATH |
Proposal ID | 199600800 |
Organization | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Tony Nigro |
Mailing address | 2501 SW First Ave. Portland, OR 97213 |
Phone / email | 5036572000 / tony.nigro@state.or.us |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 2000 |
Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide |
Short description | Test hypotheses underlying key salmon recovery management decisions, develop decision analysis to evaluate alternative management strategies, and assist in designing research, monitoring and adaptive management experiments. |
Target species | Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead |
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 |
---|---|
1996 | For Snake River salmon clarify management decisions with senior personnel in the major management institutions |
1996 | Develop hypothesis frameworks and sets of alternative hypotheses relevant to those management decisions |
1996 | Perform data reconnaissance, acquisition and refinement prior to completion of retrospective analyses of specific hypotheses |
1997 | For Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon perform detailed retrospective analyses for hypotheses related to hydrosystem, habitat, harvest and hatchery management decisions |
1997 | Through a series of five workshops involving about 30 research scientists plan retrospective and develop tools for prospective analyses, and reviewed the results of those analyses and their implications for management decisions |
1997 | Develop new analytical tools (Bayesian probabilistic approach) to assist in decision making framework |
1998 | Perform and document a Snake River Spring/summer chinook Decision Analysis for hydrosystem management alternatives |
1998 | Produce and document weight of evidence for key alternative hypotheses which influence decision analysis results |
1998 | Scientific Review Panel (SRP) charged with assigning weights to key alternative hypotheses and devloping recommendations for future PATH work |
1998 | Perform weighted decision analysis |
1998 | Perform and document a Snake River fall chinook Decision Analysis for hydrosystem management alternatives |
1998 | Assessment of actions on Steelhead |
1998 | Coordinate PATH work with other regional groups such as the Corps' DREW (economis analysis) and Decision Process Coordinating Group |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|---|---|
98 | PATH Participation NMFS | PATH scientific support |
9303701 | Simulation Modeling Participation C. Paulsen | PATH scientific support |
8910800 | Modeling PATH/ BPA technical support Univ. of Washingto | PATH scientific support |
9203200 | USFS modeling support | PATH scientific support |
9601700 | Hydrosystem Work Particiption A. Giorgi | PATH scientific support |
20515 | Mainstem Columbia River ODFW Umbrella Proposal (region umbrella) | |
9600600 | PATH, Facilitation, Tech Assistance & Peer Review (programatic umbrella) |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | NRS4 10 mos, NRS3 8 mos, NRS2 8 mos, Manager 3 mos, Office Asst. 3mos | $111,871 |
Fringe | 41% of salary | $45,867 |
Supplies | Computer Software Miscellanous | $2,379 |
Operating | Communications Computer Lease | $4,358 |
Travel | air fare, per diem, lodging, Mileage & Parking for workgroups and workshops | $4,426 |
Indirect | 35.5% | $59,959 |
Subcontractor | Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority(CBFWA) | $110,965 |
Subcontractor | U S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) | $42,721 |
Subcontractor | Washington Department of Fisheries(WDFW) | $122,046 |
Subcontractor | Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission(CRITFC) | $125,039 |
Subcontractor | Idaho Department of Fish and Game(IDFG) | $115,500 |
$745,131 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost | $745,131 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2000 budget request | $745,131 |
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Dependent upon prioritization of assignments by regional policy makers(eg. Executive Committee, Implementation Team); their assignments are influenced by many aspects of decision making process. Unexpected delay in run reconstructions and modeling.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Recommendation: Do not fund. PATH, in its present form, with its present mission, should be phased out. A simpler process could be created to meet the continuing need for evaluation of the limited data now available to address management questions relative to the hydro biological opinion. A more ambitious and comprehensive scientific consensus process should be developed, somewhat along the lines of PATH, to address data collection design issues for the basin, to identify data needs that are critical to the actual management questions, and to ensure that data needs are met, to the extent practical, as quickly as possible, in a coordinated and efficient manner.Comments: The need for Stufa participation is not very well identified in the proposal. Plans for evaluation of results and identification of measurable objectives are poorly developed. The contribution of the personnel to the project is poorly described. This proposal repeats the information from the umbrella proposal and does not provide adequate information on results to date and their input into the PATH process.
Comment:
Comment:
PATH projects reviewed in detail last year, little has changed. PATH proposals should be covered under an umbrella.Comment:
Criteria all: Met? Yes -Fund for the transition period
Oct 29, 1999
Comment:
Fund for transition period. See programmatic recommendation and comment in project 9600600.Comment:
Fund for transition
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
26. PATH (not identified by Bonneville as non-discretionary); ESSA (9600600); ODFW (9600800); NMFS (9600801).Discussion/Background: The PATH projects and process are designed to test hypotheses underlying key salmon recovery management decisions, develop decision analysis to evaluate alternative management strategies, and assist in designing research, monitoring and adaptive management experiments.
ISRP Reviews: Do not fund in the initial review. Fund for transition in the October 29, 1999 report. In both reports the ISRP recommended a different and revised process geared principally toward data collection and design issues for the basin, identifying data needs that are directly linked to management responses, and to coordinating data needs in the basin in an efficient and timely manner.
Council Recommendation: The Council recommendation consists of four major parts. Collectively, the four-part recommendation concurs with and incorporates the ISRP recommendations.
Recommendation Part 1: The three projects identified above should receive transition funding in a combined amount of $330,000 in Fiscal Year 2000, and also have remaining Fiscal Year 1999 funds available to complete the following tasks, with a planning target date that these tasks be completed by March 2000:
- Complete experimental management options and associated monitoring and evaluation. (2/00)
- Update spawner recruit information for the Snake River, mid-and lower Columbia River spring/summer Chinook stocks (12/99).
- Assist with stock status for Quantitative Analytical Reports (QAR) for upper Columbia and lower Columbia stocks.
- Assist in development of analysis for QAR.
- SRP review of fall Chinook and experimental management reports.
- ESSA and PATH work with NMFS to complete development of CRI metrics for PATH outputs to facilitate comparison.
- ESSA and PATH work with Council to completed development of EDT metrics for PATH outputs to facilitate comparison.
- ESSA to provide to Council data files (full outputs) from all model runs reported in PATH spring/summer Chinook (12/8) and fall Chinook (11/99) reports.
- ESSA to provide to Council copies of Bayesian Simulation Model.
- Anderson to provide to Council a copy of the CriSP model, including input files used for PATH spring/summer and fall chinook reports.
- Publish PATH methods/results in peer-reviewed journal.
- Assess key differences between PATH and CRI.
- Assess feasibility of actions to improve survivals at different life stages.
Recommendation Part 2: Beyond the completion of these specific activities, the Council recommends that its staff work with state, tribal and federal parties who have participated in PATH to develop a new data collection and analysis system that has the following five attributes:
The new data system would have to meet certain specific needs of the Council and the region. For example, a new data system would:
- Allow the Council to evaluate the effectiveness of each individual project funded by BPA.
- Allow the Council to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the Council's program;
- Provide baseline populations from which the Council can establish meaningful quantitative goals;
- Allow the region to evaluate progress on recovery measures for all endangered species;
- Include all species relevant to the Council's program: anadromous fish, resident fish and wildlife.
Recommendation Part 3: The Council expects that any data system proposal will include provisions for oversight and management to ensure accountability and orderly administration.
Recommendation Part 4: The Council may ask that the ISRP or ISAB review the data management system, and take comments of those bodies into account in making its funding recommendation. Part 3, item 27, below, provides additional discussion regarding the Council's treatment of the ISRP's recommendations about the funding of PATH-related projects.
Comment:
[Decision made in 12-7-99 Council Meeting]; fund thru 3/2000; receiving portion of $330,000 for transition - [entered as $110,000 for each of 3 transition projects - sysadmin]Comment:
Comment: