FY 2001 Innovative proposal 22025

Additional documents

TitleType
22025 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleIdentification and assessment of technologies and methods to census spawning adult population size of spring and summer chinook salmon
Proposal ID22025
OrganizationNez Perce Tribe (NPT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameRick Orme
Mailing addressPO Box 1942 McCall, ID 83638
Phone / email2086345390 / RickO@NezPerce.org
Manager authorizing this projectJamie Pinkham
Review cycleFY 2001 Innovative
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake / Salmon
Short descriptionIdentification of new and inovative methods to accurately and precisely enumerate chinook salmon spawner abundance.
Target speciesChinook Salmon
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
44.3042 -114.3593 Poverty Flat
45.0248 -115.7065 Secesh River
44.9625 -115.5008 Johnson Creek
44.5546 -115.2974 Sulphur Creek
44.4493 -115.2301 Marsh Creek
44.4105 -115.3717 Elk Creek
44.4492 -115.2301 Bear Valley
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2001 cost
Personnel FTE: 3.5 (1.75 in FY 2001, 1.75 in FY 2002) $113,000
Fringe For FY 2001 and FY 2002 $38,000
Supplies For FY 2001 and FY 2002 $35,000
Travel For FY 2001 and FY 2002 $15,000
Indirect For FY 2001 and FY 2002 $45,000
Subcontractor # of tags: Preliminary and final engenerring design $150,000
$396,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost$396,000
Total FY 2001 budget request$396,000
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Not Innovative
Date:
Dec 15, 2000

Comment:

The proposal does not meet the requirements of an innovative proposal. It does not propose to develop new procedures and methods for estimation of spawner abundance with a design for monitoring and evaluation of results. The sponsors ask for funds to "Identify all available methods and technologies that would allow for accurate total abundance of spring and summer chinook salmon during the entire run." To be funded, this proposal should identify, discuss, and propose to evaluate an innovative procedure (or procedures) to accurately estimate total abundance of spawners. The proposal addresses a problem of critical importance in the basin, i.e. enumeration of spawning populations of salmon and steelhead. Innovative approaches are needed to address the problem. While the idea is commendable and ought to be pursued, it does not meet the Council's standards for innovative projects.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jan 17, 2001

Comment:

Agree with ISRP comments.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jan 17, 2001

Comment:

Agree with ISRP comments.