FY07-09 proposal 200732700

Jump to Reviews and Recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleCompilation of Location-Specific Hatchery Release Data in Consistent Format Across Agencies by StreamNet
Proposal ID200732700
OrganizationPacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC)
Short descriptionDetailed fish liberation data for anadromous and resident fish species will be developed from multiple agencies. The data will show detailed release location information (not "rolled up") and posted through the StreamNet online database query system.
Information transferData compiled by this project will be incorporated into the StreamNet database and made available via the StreamNet on-line query system at http://www.streamnet.org.
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Contacts
ContactOrganizationEmail
Form submitter
Mike Banach Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission mike_banach@psmfc.org
All assigned contacts
Bruce Schmidt Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission bruce_schmidt@psmfc.org
Bruce Schmidt Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission bruce_schmidt@psmfc.org

Section 2. Locations

Province / subbasin: Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide

LatitudeLongitudeWaterbodyDescription
All waters of the state.
All Columbia Basin waters of the state.
All Columbia Basin waters of the state.
All Columbia Basin waters of the state.

Section 3. Focal species

primary: All Anadromous Salmonids
secondary: Anadromous Fish
secondary: Resident Fish

Section 4. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishments

Section 5. Relationships to other projects

Funding sourceRelated IDRelated titleRelationship
BPA 198201301 Coded Wire Tag - PSMFC This project will try to create closer working relationships between RMIS and StreamNet. We will move toward standardizing data structures and location coding. We will also search for ways in which hatchery release data flow to RMIS and StreamNet can be made more efficient.
BPA 198201302 Coded Wire Tag - ODFW This project will try to create closer working relationships between RMIS and StreamNet. We will move toward standardizing data structures and location coding. We will also search for ways in which hatchery release data flow to RMIS and StreamNet can be made more efficient.
BPA 198201303 Coded Wire Tag - USFWS This project will try to create closer working relationships between RMIS and StreamNet. We will move toward standardizing data structures and location coding. We will also search for ways in which hatchery release data flow to RMIS and StreamNet can be made more efficient.
BPA 198201304 Coded Wire Tag - WDFW This project will try to create closer working relationships between RMIS and StreamNet. We will move toward standardizing data structures and location coding. We will also search for ways in which hatchery release data flow to RMIS and StreamNet can be made more efficient.
BPA 198810804 Streamnet (CIS/NED) This project will expand the capabilities of StreamNet in providing regional coordination and in providing a new type of data. This project will try to create closer working relationships between RMIS and StreamNet. We will move toward standardizing data structures and location coding. We will also search for ways in which hatchery release data flow to RMIS and StreamNet can be made more efficient.

Section 6. Biological objectives

Biological objectivesFull descriptionAssociated subbasin planStrategy
Support effective management and restoration Data consolidation makes information from multiple sources conveniently available in consistent format to managers, researchers and decision makers in support of management and restoration actions. This indirectly supports a variety of biological objectives. None Evaluating the effects (+ and -) of hatchery fish requires extensive knowledge of where those fish were released. This project will consolidate information about releases at individual locations and make it available for use in evaluation of hatcheries.

Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)

Work element nameWork element titleDescriptionStart dateEnd dateEst budget
Submit/Acquire Data Acquire data on releases of anadromous salmonids, by individual location. The agency partners will acquire, standardize and georeference data on the individual (un-rolled) releases of hatchery reared anadromous fish and submit them to the StreamNet database. This will be done in cooperation with the agencies rearing the fish. 10/1/2006 9/30/2010 $172,512
Biological objectives
Metrics
Submit/Acquire Data Acquire data on the stocking of resident fishes, by individual stocking location StreamNet's partners in the fish agencies will acquire, standardize and georeference data on the stocking of resident fishes, by location, and submit the data to the StreamNet database. 10/1/2006 9/30/2010 $140,085
Biological objectives
Metrics
Create/Manage/Maintain Database Database management and tool development for capture and exchange of stocking data Agency partners will develop data management tools to capture and manage release data, develop and conform to a standard data format and location coding, manage, and quality check the data. The existing data exchange format for release data will be evaluated and used as the basis for a new format. 10/1/2006 9/30/2010 $281,775
Biological objectives
Metrics
Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results Disseminate data on stocking of resident and anadromous fishes Agency partners will disseminate release data through agency websites and by exchanging the data to the StreamNet database for widespread dissemination through www.streamnet.org 10/1/2006 9/30/2010 $13,178
Biological objectives
Metrics

Section 8. Budgets

Itemized estimated budget
ItemNoteFY07FY08FY09
Personnel Expenditures by subcontractors in partner agencies $103,061 $108,214 $113,625
Fringe Benefits [blank] $39,834 $41,826 $43,917
Supplies [blank] $4,545 $4,772 $5,011
Travel [blank] $1,276 $1,340 $1,407
Overhead [blank] $44,004 $46,204 $48,514
Totals $192,720 $202,356 $212,474
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
Total itemized budget: $607,550
Total work element budget: $607,550
Cost sharing
Funding source/orgItem or service providedFY 07 est value ($)FY 08 est value ($)FY 09 est value ($)Cash or in-kind?Status
Totals $0 $0 $0

Section 9. Project future

FY 2010 estimated budget: $200,000
FY 2011 estimated budget: $200,000
Comments: The ultimate goal is to develop automated processes to capture fish release data, which would begin to reduce costs of acquiring and standardizing those data.

Future O&M costs: In the long term, we anticipate building automated routines that would automate data capture. Those applications would have to be maintained over time, but at a reduced cost to developing the routines.

Termination date: Unknown
Comments: Data compilation to consolidate similar data from multiple agency sources and standardize them will be a long term program. We anticipate decreasing workload as more of the process can be automated, but the project would not terminate in entirety.

Final deliverables: Annual delivery of updated data on the release of anadromous hatchery produced salmonids and the stocking of hatchery produced resident salmonids.

Section 10. Narrative and other documents


Reviews and recommendations

FY07 budget FY08 budget FY09 budget Total budget Type Category Recommendation
NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs]
$0 $0 $0 $0 Expense Basinwide Do Not Fund
NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs]
$0 $0 $0 $0 Basinwide

ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)

Recommendation: Response requested

NPCC comments: This proposal describes database improvements that are very likely to be useful to the Basin. The ISRP noted the need for this type of information in the previous review process (systemwide/provincial). All anadromous and resident fish would likely benefit from an improved information base. However, not enough detail is presented in the proposal about how this will be done. The sponsors should provide additional detail to better describe exactly what is planned. The sponsors propose to increase the quantity and consistency of hatchery release data by capturing more detailed release data than is currently done and expanding data coverage to all water bodies and species of fish. The proposal provides a good description of the data issues and the utility of taking a more comprehensive approach. Some efforts along these lines are documented in the proposal, but it notes that without further resources progress will remain slow. This raises the question: what cost and time savings are expected to result from this project? The proposal makes reference to some potential problems in getting the level of cooperation that is necessary from various agencies. It would be helpful to know the nature of the potential constraints and how the sponsors intend to address them. Is there continuing resistance among states to standardizing data? Are the tribal agencies part of this project? The project would seem to have clear rationale. The significance of this project is summarized as a bulleted list. These seem reasonable, but it would be useful to have more explanation under each bullet. There is no citation of how this work has been prioritized by the Fish and Wildlife Program, the BiOp, or other planning documents. The proposal is clearly tied to the core StreamNet effort. It would be helpful to demonstrate how the data provided by this project will assist or tie in with other projects in the Basin. The methods seem reasonable but are not presented in great detail. As an example, for automated data exchange, the statement is made that "we are not certain how much progress is possible at this time." It would be helpful to identify the likely constraints and the approach to removing them. Similarly, "acquire data" deserves more detailed explanation of approach than is provided. It is not clear how to determine the success of the project because no description of monitoring and evaluation is provided. Surely quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) monitoring would be relevant here as would be setting performance targets and assessing the extent to which they are being met? Information transfer is through data dissemination. Data compiled by this project will be incorporated into the StreamNet database and made available via the StreamNet on-line query system. There is the potential in a project like this to also learn about the process and challenges of data coordination. The sponsors should identify strategies to summarize lessons learned for the benefit of other efforts.


ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)

Recommendation: Response requested

NPCC comments: This proposal describes database improvements that are very likely to be useful to the Basin. The ISRP noted the need for this type of information in the previous review process (systemwide/provincial). All anadromous and resident fish would likely benefit from an improved information base. However, not enough detail is presented in the proposal about how this will be done. The sponsors should provide additional detail to better describe exactly what is planned. The sponsors propose to increase the quantity and consistency of hatchery release data by capturing more detailed release data than is currently done and expanding data coverage to all water bodies and species of fish. The proposal provides a good description of the data issues and the utility of taking a more comprehensive approach. Some efforts along these lines are documented in the proposal, but it notes that without further resources progress will remain slow. This raises the question: what cost and time savings are expected to result from this project? The proposal makes reference to some potential problems in getting the level of cooperation that is necessary from various agencies. It would be helpful to know the nature of the potential constraints and how the sponsors intend to address them. Is there continuing resistance among states to standardizing data? Are the tribal agencies part of this project? The project would seem to have clear rationale. The significance of this project is summarized as a bulleted list. These seem reasonable, but it would be useful to have more explanation under each bullet. There is no citation of how this work has been prioritized by the Fish and Wildlife Program, the BiOp, or other planning documents. The proposal is clearly tied to the core StreamNet effort. It would be helpful to demonstrate how the data provided by this project will assist or tie in with other projects in the Basin. The methods seem reasonable but are not presented in great detail. As an example, for automated data exchange, the statement is made that "we are not certain how much progress is possible at this time." It would be helpful to identify the likely constraints and the approach to removing them. Similarly, "acquire data" deserves more detailed explanation of approach than is provided. It is not clear how to determine the success of the project because no description of monitoring and evaluation is provided. Surely quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) monitoring would be relevant here as would be setting performance targets and assessing the extent to which they are being met? Information transfer is through data dissemination. Data compiled by this project will be incorporated into the StreamNet database and made available via the StreamNet on-line query system. There is the potential in a project like this to also learn about the process and challenges of data coordination. The sponsors should identify strategies to summarize lessons learned for the benefit of other efforts.