FY 2001 High Priority proposal 23068
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 |
|---|---|
| 23068 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Fish Presence Survey & Georeference Data Entry |
| Proposal ID | 23068 |
| Organization | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Cedric Cooney |
| Mailing address | 28655 HWY 34 Corvallis, Oregon 97333 |
| Phone / email | 5417574263 / cooneyc@fsl.orst.edu |
| Manager authorizing this project | Rick Kepler |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Deschutes |
| Short description | Enhance fish distribution and barrier information as well as on-the-ground project evaluation and assessment abilities by inputing a backlog of existing hardcopy Fish Presence Survey data into ODFW's electronic database. |
| Target species | Coho, Cutthroat, Rainbow, Steelhead, Bulltrout, chinook |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 44.35 | -121 | Deschutes subbasin |
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 |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 0.58 | $19,300 |
| Fringe | $7,720 | |
| Supplies | (plotter paper, plotter ink, postage, CDs, etc.) | $2,500 |
| Travel | $750 | |
| Indirect | 0.201 | $7,447 |
| $37,717 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $37,717 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $37,717 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| ODFW (Oregon Plan) | Input data throughout the State, including within the Columbia Basin however map production is not funded by this effort. | $20,000 | cash |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This proposal for data compilation and management does not address imminent risks to ESA stocks by offering direct on-the-ground benefits with one-time funding.Comment:
As a data collection effort it will not provide direct benefits. There appear to be in lieu issues with this proposal.